Zionism is an ingredient part of Judaism just as some claim Secularism to be connected to Christianity.
Odd. Secularism is a political construct; Christianity is IMHO a highly apolitical religion. Both can exist side by side, but they do not share ideological roots. Zionism is a political movement; rabbinic Judaism is a religion. The former was neither borne out of nor necessarily dependent on the latter.
The law of return of the Jews which you agree is discriminatory like the immigration policies of some nations bear a high degree of difference from that of other nations because of its appeal to religion and blood as argued earlier as the subject of the first post of this thread. I think it is good thing to be able to differentiate what is coincidence and a stated purpose on strong ideological and religious claims.
Ideological? Yes. Religious? No. That's my point. Israel's Law of Return overwhelmingly favors ethnic and religious Jews because Israel is intended to be a national refuge for Jewish communities around the world, period. That was and is the Zionist goal to date, and it has nothing to do with alleged Jewish supremacist theories in Judaism.
If Jews have lived in Palestine for centuries, others too have lived there for centuries. After all this fact is not missed in the chronology we gave in the first post of this thread. The question is why must they have better claim to the land more than others?
In this we reviewed history and the religious scripts to arrive at the conclusion that:
It is the meek that shall always inherit the Land
And there is no way the killings the Jews have been killing the Palestinians since 60 years ago can pass across of meekness or righteousness.
Ok, but how about the terror tactics of Palestinian freedom fighters against civillian life? Surely that does not qualify as meekness or righteousness, does it? Can't objectively choose one without the other.
Well, many maybe interested in arguing or just saying something around here for the sake of saying it. But I prefer if the subject matter of my article be properly addressed. Otherwise I will have no option than to declare my intention to refrain from further commenting on this thread.
I don't know what you think the subject matter should be. However judging by the nature of your article, it would be difficult to predict the sort of responses to expect. It doesn't seem like your alternate thread on NVS
is doing much better. Ironically enough, the NVS forumner Eja, whom you were actually responding to in your article, also felt that you ignored more pressing matters of his post.