[noemon]

Lightman, the Corsican event is the one that I have a fresh memory of because we discussed this recently and it is as I told you but before they voluntarily left for Algeria they were pogromed by the Corsicans and not just once but numerous times, there are numerous other events similar to that one, the expulsion and murder of Greeks from Constantinople by the Catholics is another one that comes to mind at this moment. If you peruse Greek medieval history you will find numerous examples before and after the fall of the Roman Empire, if you read the history of various European communities in Germany, Russia, Scandinavia, you will notice that it has always been standard practice to expel people who found themselves in the wrong side of a fight until the advent of liberalism and civil rights. And that is why for example all Greeks had their surnames(latinised) and religion changed before they were allowed to settle to other European places. It was standard practice and in many ways a lot more discriminatory than the protection afforded to Jews to remain Jews.

edit: Another event that just came to my mind is the Greeks being pogromed by Mormons in Iowa in the 1900's.

It was not a recommendation

Whether it can is not an order but a recommendation, besides why deny the obvious:

"The Basic Law: Israel Lands" establishes the principle that Israel Lands are nationally owned, and they can only be leased, not sold. So land buyers are granted only lessee's rights, formally not full ownership rights. Based on this law and several other laws Israel Land Administration was created in 1960. It's an organization supervising the proper use of lands in the public domain and managing some 93% of Israeli lands.

Starting from the beginning of the 2000s there is an ongoing debate including governmental officials whether different issues arising from the national ownership of the land can be solved. On July 12, 2003 and on February 4, 2004 the Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee met as the committee for the Constitution by Broad Consensus to discuss this problem.[1]

One basic issue was the difference in the rights of Jewish citizens and non-Jewish citizens. Palestinians could not purchase land in most Jewish areas. Nor could Palestinians expand their villages as population growth demanded, but Jewish villages could readily expand as needed. These issues have not been addressed in the land reform discussions.

And lastly what if someone is not an Israeli? Jews in Europe do not need to be nationals to buy land in Europe.

Except that there were Bishops who called their followed not to recognize the new Patriarch and that the issue was brought to Israeli courts, of course.

Show me your claims of Israeli courts being brought the case to them and even them having any jurisdiction and say on the matter of the appointment of the Greek-Orthodox Bishop.

Theophilos (also spelled Theofilos or Theophilus) was elected by the Holy Synod of Jerusalem as the 141st primate of the Orthodox Church of Jerusalem on 22 August 2005, confirmed by the pan-Orthodox Synod of Constantinople. The election was endorsed by Jordan on 24 September 2005, as one of the three governments whose endorsement is required.[2] He was enthroned on 22 November 2005, despite Israeli objection. Theophilos had previously petitioned the Israeli government for recognition of the election.[3] The Israeli government officially recognised his election on 16 December 2007.

Theophilos was elected unanimously by Jerusalem's Holy Synod to succeed the deposed Irenaios I. Theophilos is regarded as having been more favorable to his deposed predecessor, which may assist him in bringing stability to the troubled patriarchate as Irenaios's supporters may thus unite around him and make peace with the synod. Upon his election, Theophilos said, "In the last few months we have had a lot of problems but with the help of God we will overcome them."[4]

He was officially enthroned as Patriarch of Jerusalem and All Palestine[6] on November 22, 2005. Delegates from all of the Orthodox Churches as well as high secular dignitaries were in attendance, including the President of Greece, and senior officials representing the governments of Palestinian National Authority, Jordan and Qatar, as well as diplomats and military officials.[7]

Why did Israel discriminate against the Custodian of the Holy Sepulcher?

[Lightman]

Lightman, the Corsican event is the one that I have a fresh memory of because we discussed this recently and it is as I told you but before they voluntarily left for Algeria they were pogromed by the Corsicans and not just once but numerous times, there are numerous other events similar to that one, the expulsion and murder of Greeks from Constantinople by the Catholics is another one that comes to mind at this moment. If you peruse Greek medieval history you will find numerous examples before and after the fall of the Roman Empire, if you read the history of various European communities in Germany, Russia, Scandinavia, you will notice that it has always been standard practice to expel people who found themselves in the wrong side of a fight until the advent of liberalism and civil rights. And that is why for example all Greeks had their surnames(latinised) and religion changed before they were allowed to settle to other European places. It was standard practice and in many ways a lot more discriminatory than the protection afforded to Jews to remain Jews.

No, please, noemon, I insist. I would love some good historical sources on the mass expulsion of Greeks from France, Spain, and Italy. I can't find a single instance of this on wikipedia, which I doubt has an anti-Greek bias. The closest I can find is something about Italianization on the Dodecanese Islands under Mussolini's rule, a process that affected Greeks, Turks, and Jews and ended with the deportation of the Jews (though not the Greeks or Turks, unless I'm missing something?) from those islands. I am genuinely historically interested.

[wat0n]

Whether it can is not an order but a recommendation,

The paragraph states explicitly it is an order.

besides why deny the obvious:

Your unwillingness to read carefully primary sources that show your claims are incorrect? Because that is the only obvious thing I can see here.

And lastly what if someone is not an Israeli? Jews in Europe do not need to be nationals to buy land in Europe.

Well, that is one reason of why there is a debate on privatizing the land currently owned by the state (among others, like the high administrative costs of the current system). That doesn't mean that Israeli non-Jews are forbidden from leasing land, though.

Show me your claims of Israeli courts being brought the case to them and even them having any jurisdiction and say on the matter of the appointment of the Greek-Orthodox Bishop.

The issue of recognition by the government was brought to Israeli courts. Both by Theophilos and Irenaios sued to get recognition by the Israeli State at different points in time (the former before the state recognized him, the latter to undo this recognition), ultimately Theophilos prevailed. All of this was in the Wikipedia section I quoted earlier.

I don't think I need to say that, regardless of who the state recognized, it would be in trouble since the whole thing was a mess within the Church itself. And indeed, even Jordan refused to recognize Theophilos at some point in time.

[Zamuel]

Anti-Semitism is a deep seated affliction, that isn't going to be cured here on Pofo. It's irrational, and indicates personal problems at it's root.

The term "Anti-Semitism" is a linguistic fraud, created by Zionists. The term "Anti-Semitism" implies that somebody is hated because of his or her alleged "Semitism".

The term was probably 1st used around 1860 by a Jewish scholar to describe various form of "Judenhass" (Hatred of Jews) collectively. It didn't catch on ... But in 1880 it was used by a German Journalist, William Marr. Marr's pamphlets were a hit! and he used their popularity to found the "League of Anti-Semites" which formalized the new term and promoted it's usage.

So no ... it wasn't a Zionist plot, ... Though they found the term useful and adopted it without hesitation. Neither was it a Fraud ... a contemporary publication of the time, the "Jewish Encyclopedia" noted the term as "a designation which recently came into use". Simply a collective linguistic expression of similar abstract concepts.

It does not make any sense to hate entire groups of people because of their alleged "Semitism", but it is perfectly rational to hate distinct persons who try to hide behind terms, like "Semitism", and who claim that they are hated not because of their behavior, but because of their alleged "Semitism" (speak the perceived group identity).

It evidently made plenty of sense to the European Population of the lather 19th century ... Who originated the popular concepts later revived and adopted by the Nazis. The general concept of Anti-Semitism has NEVER indicted the Individual Jew ... The MANY published anti-Semitic works from Marr - Hitler himself focus on Jews as an objectionable Race and Culture.

Do you want to know MORE ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism

Zam

[noemon]

No, please, noemon, I insist. I would love some good historical sources on the mass expulsion of Greeks from France, Spain, and Italy. I can't find a single instance of this on wikipedia, which I doubt has an anti-Greek bias. The closest I can find is something about Italianization on the Dodecanese Islands under Mussolini's rule, a process that affected Greeks, Turks, and Jews and ended with the deportation of the Jews (though not the Greeks or Turks, unless I'm missing something?) from those islands. I am genuinely historically interested.

I gave you 3 examples off my memory, 1 in Corsica where the Greeks were pogromed by Corsicans, 1 in Iowa where the Greeks were pogromed by Mormons(I edited the post above) and one in Constantinople where the Greeks were pogromed by the Catholics. Unlike you I do not keep a handy list of the times Greeks have been pogromed, neither I nor the Greeks advertise themselves as victims in wiki or anywhere in fact, to find these events you need to be told about them just like you have been told and have confirmed it yourself, not visit some 'anti-Greek history' article in English wiki.

These 3 examples quite suffice to demonstrate my point that there is absolutely nothing special about people being pogromed and expelled historically, also during your reading about these events you must have also come to the realization that unlike Jews, Greeks were always forced to change their surnames and religion before being granted access in Europe. So your claim about some special European racism during the middle-ages against Jews is already sufficiently gone. When more events such as these come to my mind I will let you know, but I will not stop my House of Cards viewing to collect more than 3 examples. European history is there, and if you bothered to read medieval history about people other than your own you would notice various violent stuff happening among Christians.

Also your claims have been torn apart with many other arguments as well, your failure to provide any context regarding the question posed to you of when, where and by whom is also outstanding and something that I need to insist as well, remember you made the claim in the first place, if you like we can rehearse it once more if you forgot it already.

Your unwillingness to read carefully primary sources that show your claims are incorrect? Well, that is one reason of why there is a debate on privatizing the land currently owned by the state (among others, like the high administrative costs of the current system). That doesn't mean that Israeli non-Jews are forbidden from leasing land, though.

The Court ruling is quite explicitly not ordering anybody and the wiki article itself is quite blatant on the matter. Ofc you will never admit to something since you did not do that already in the other thread, noone expects from you to do it in this one. Fact is Europeans along with Muslims do not have the same civil rights the Jews have in Europe, whether they are Israelis or not.

The issue of recognition by the government was brought to Israeli courts.

Show me evidence that a legal matter prevented Theophilos's recognition and show me what kind of jurisdiction does Israel have to object to the decisions taken by the Christian Church.

The previous Greek Patriarch had illegally leased land to Israel and that is why he was deposed, that is also why Israel did not want to let him go and tried to prevent his successor from taking the throne. This is interference in internal Christian matters that no Rabbi would put up with in Europe or America. Or do you claim otherwise?
Do you find it appropriate for Europeans to start interfering in Synagogues and their property in this manner in the millennium?

[Lightman]

And Heinie is correct, Greeks have been expelled from Italy, France and Spain several times in the past but are not considered as holding a special title of a historically persecuted diaspora by anyone in the world except for Greek supremacists.

I'm asking for information on mass expulsions, neomon, not ethnic pogroms. Pogroms are a fucking evil and I sympathize with any group that suffered from them. But Greeks were never expelled en masse from European countries (excluding Turkey and Northern Cyprus in the 20th century).

Jews were expelled from England and Wales in 1290; France in 1182 and again in 1306, 1321, and 1394; Spain, Sardinia, and Sicily in 1492; Portugal in 1497, and...well, why don't I just link to the map of Jewish expulsion?

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

1 in Iowa where the Greeks were pogromed by Mormons(I edited the post above)

Do you have any source for this at all, or know where you heard that? There was a pretty nasty incident in Utah where the Mormons used the Utes to kill a group of settlers passing westwards and then married the women and raised the children, but I have never heard of any incident in Iowa, of all places, where the Mormons committed an act of violence, nor is an internet search pulling up any results. Most incidents of violence involving Mormons at that time had to do with people committing acts of violence against Mormons, which was the impetus for them heading west and creating small settlements in places like Missouri or Iowa on their way to Utah.

[Lightman]

I think neomon might be confusing Iowa with Nebraska and Utah; there were anti-Greek riots in both areas in the early twentieth century. Americans have always been terribly cruel to recent immigrants, unfortunately.

[noemon]

All the Greeks under the jurisdiction of the French were expelled in mass from Corsica, all the Greeks under the jurisdiction of the Catholics were pogromed and expelled in mass by the Catholics in 1204. All the Greeks in (edited, corrected:) Omaha Nebraska were pogromed and forced to leave the state.

Aside from infamous Turkey, modern examples include Nasser's Egypt and Soviet Russia.

Your insistence to qualitative discriminate pain and suffering as belonging to different categories(what categories are those?) between people is noted.

Also you have yet to address these very simple arguments:

You have a very misinformed perception of history, but before the French revolution, Europeans did not have civil rights for themselves either, they were also subject to the whims of the feudal lords and their vendettas as much as the Jews were. As soon as the Europeans fought for their own civil liberties they extended those liberties to the Jews as well which means that the majority of Europeans have considered the Jews their brothers. The Greeks and French that I know of for sure were subject to the exact same extra-judicial persecution by the authorities as the Jews were and when they managed to break their chains, they broke the chains of the Jews along with their own. So I do not take it all kindly when people do not even recognize basic courtesy to the people that gave them such great respect and recognition.

You do not make sense here. National and ethnic rights apply to national and ethnic communities, if ethnic communities are discriminated then the state discriminating is being racist, you claim that Europeans who provided equal right to ethnic Jews were being antisemitic, while at the same time not taking any issue with the fact that Jews do not grant this courtesy back to Europeans or Muslims. So what are the Israeli Jews by your own logic? And why do you bother with Europeans who have nothing more to give instead of bothering with your own people who have things that they are in fact supposed to give like egalitarianism for example.

I do not see anything different to what the Jews went through, every time a Greek leader chose the wrong side in a fight, the entire community had to pick up and leave, that was standard practice in Europe and applicable to various European populations even co-nationals sworn to the wrong lord.

This statement is false and requires context and citations, where, when by who? Blanket statements completely lack historical merit.

I think neomon might be confusing Iowa with Nebraska and Utah; there were anti-Greek riots in both areas in the early twentieth century. Americans have always been terribly cruel to recent immigrants, unfortunately.

I might be, I'm not entirely sure but it was in a Greek-American documentary I watched a couple of years ago, I'll try to find it later, it had to do with the Unions, the Miners, something like that anyway. As I said we do not actively collect all our pain and suffering in wiki articles, it is intentional. I recall the name Iowa, but I could be mistaken.

[Zamuel]

1 in Iowa where the Greeks were pogromed by Mormons(I edited the post above)

Do you have any source for this at all, or know where you heard that?

Yeah ... ? The US census in 1900 lists 18 greeks as living in Iowa ... Must have been a small pogom ... The Mormon trek across Iowa is pretty well documented and ? there's nothing there regarding any incident with Greeks ... I was born in Newton and raised in Des Moines and ? never heard of anything.

Zam

[noemon]

I tried to find this Mormon Iowa incident but I couldn't I most likely have confused it with the one in Omaha Nebraska, I found these 2 large events during my brief search:

Pogrom in Toronto 1918:

[youtube]IBHq1ZJjDz8[/youtube]

Pogrom in Omaha Nebraska 35-38 minute:

[youtube]OohHsI4frZw[/youtube]

In the early 20th century Greeks in the United States were discriminated against in many ways. In 1904 Greek immigrants, unaware of labor conditions and largely inexperienced, served as strikebreakers during a strike in Chicago diesel shops. This fueled anti-Greek sentiment among union members. Three Greek immigrants were killed during a riot in 1908 in McGill, Nevada.[48] On February 21, 1909 a major anti-Greek riot took place in South Omaha, Nebraska. The Greek population was forced to leave the city, while properties owned by Greek migrants were destroyed.[49] Greeks were viewed with particular contempt in the Mormon stronghold of Utah. The local press characterized them as "a vicious element unfit for citizenship and as ignorant, depraved, and brutal foreigners." Anti-Greek riots occurred in Salt Lake City in 1917 which "almost resulted" in lynching of a Greek immigrant.[48

[Lightman]

All the Greeks under the jurisdiction of the French were expelled in mass from Corsica, all the Greeks under the jurisdiction of the Catholics were pogromed and expelled in mass by the Catholics in 1204. All the Greek under the jurisdiction of the Mormons were pogromed in Iowa(edit: Utah?, perhaps I'm mistaken on the location here but the event did happen) and forced to leave the state.

There was no edicts of expulsion in the Corsican case, and I am fairly sure (though not certain) there was no edict of expulsion in the Sack of Constantinople, though obviously there was deeply awful mass violence there (partially in response to a similar massacre of Catholics that had occurred a few decades earlier). They were not mass expulsions. Certainly massacres and ethnic riots are horrible, but they are qualitatively different from mass expulsions.

I am not saying that the sufferings of Greeks is irrelevant or unimportant. I am saying that there was a clear pattern of expulsion and violence that disproportionately affected Jews throughout Europe. Almost every ethnic group throughout history has suffered from ethnic violence, but the Jews, along with several other groups in Europe (the Roma, Cathars, Muslims, European pagans, etc.), were especially targeted across national boundaries for centuries. You can point to a few instances of ethnic violence against the Greeks (one of which occurred in the 20th century United States, one of which occurred in Anatolia, one of which you exaggerate into a mass expulsion), but the Greeks generally speaking were not consistently subject to the same level of persecution as the Jews and those other groups.

Even in the case of the Latin Empire in Constantinople, you can see Jewish persecution. The Latin Emperors confiscated Jewish property and attempted to force Constantinople Jews to convert to Christianity.

I am not trying to convince anyone that other groups in Europe have not suffered. I am not trying to convince anyone that Jewish suffering is unique or even that they have been the most persecuted group in European history. I am not trying to pretend that every Jew is somehow morally pure or that no Jew has ever inflicted harm on a Gentile. I am not even trying to convince anyone anything about Israel - I am not from Israel, I have never been to Israel, and my support for Israel is extremely marginal. But what I can't stand is the erasure of Jewish history, including the history of anti-Semitism. It deeply annoys me off that people try to pretend that Jews were not repeatedly expelled, massacred, subject to legal disabilities, forced to wear yellow stars, excluded from certain professions, and forcibly converted to Christianity. Jews were repeatedly treated as a foreign parasite in Europe. I don't demand anything from Europeans, except that they stop lying about their history.

[wat0n]

The Court ruling is quite explicitly not ordering anybody

Yes it is. It includes the word "order" and also specifies the conditions of it, as shown in the quoted paragraph

and the wiki article itself is quite blatant on the matter.

Court rulings are a primary source, unlike Wikipedia.

Ofc you will never admit to something since you did not do that already in the other thread, noone expects from you to do it in this one. Fact is Europeans along with Muslims do not have the same civil rights the Jews have in Europe, whether they are Israelis or not.

I have no reason to admit something that isn't true.

Show me evidence that a legal matter prevented Theophilos's recognition and show me what kind of jurisdiction does Israel have to object to the decisions taken by the Christian Church.

I already told you, it's on the Wikipedia article I quoted. Indeed it's on the quote itself.

The Church traditionally tries to get recognition by whoever controls the Jerusalem Patriarchate area, of course if Israel doesn't recognize the Patriarch it has no legal consequences for him, but it can make his life quite miserable since the Church depends on having good relations with Israel (along with Jordan and the PA) for obvious reasons.

The previous Greek Patriarch had illegally leased land to Israel and that is why he was deposed, that is also why Israel did not want to let him go and tried to prevent his successor from taking the throne. This is interference in internal Christian matters that no Rabbi would put up with in Europe or America. Or do you claim otherwise?
Do you find it appropriate for Europeans to start interfering in Synagogues and their property in this manner in the millennium?

It's funny that you mention it, according to Wikipedia:

A few years into Irenaios' patriarchate, he was accused of selling several parcels of church-owned land in the Old City of Jerusalem to Israeli developers.

As most of the Orthodox Christians in the area are Palestinian, and the land was in an Arab-populated area that most Palestinians hoped would become as a part of a future Palestinian capital, these accusations caused a great deal of concern among Church members. On March 19, 2005, the Palestinian Authority formed a commission to investigate these allegations.

After a thorough investigation by the commission, the commission exonerated Patriarch Ireneos and concluded that the accusations made against him were "A very well calculated plan ... schemed by a number of clerics opposing Ireneos in collaboration with Israeli Extreme Right Wingers. Their interest converged in the aim of getting rid of Ireneos step by step." The report also concluded that "In accordance with the applicable law in East Jerusalem, Patriarch Ireneos is still the legitimate Patriarch enjoying full powers."[1]

Again, the whole thing is rather messy. It does show however that the governments of the area care a lot about what happens inside it.

Not that any of this matters, since you won't read this just as you did not read any of the quotations from the aforementioned sources I provided here. I will still highlight this however.

[Zamuel]

I tried to find this Mormon Iowa incident but I couldn't I most likely have confused it - In the early 20th century Greeks in the United States were discriminated against in many ways.

Most later immigrations to the US were followed by persecutions ... These are historically incidental disruptions, not sustained cultural /racial animosities. Anti-Semitism differs in being a sustained animosity. It began with the Judean revolt against Rome and has continued ever since. You can learn a lot about the mechanics and tactics of persecution from the incidental persecutions, you can also see how cultural assimilation ended them. The Jews were never assimilated, never ALLOWED association that could lead to assimilation. They were "different."

Why? do you suppose this relatively peaceful, non aggressive, friendly, culture inspired so much FEAR in the authority that confronted them ?

How is it that their enemies came to view Anti-Semitism as a NECESSARY defense of Western Culture from the Jews ... ?

Whom have the Jews ever overwhelmed and consumed ?

Zam

[noemon]

Certainly massacres and ethnic riots are horrible, but they are qualitatively different from mass expulsions.

Indeed, massacring people is qualitatively worse than expelling them. Forcing them to change their surnames and religion is also qualitatively worse than letting them be themselves.

I don't demand anything from Europeans, except that they stop lying about their history.

Where the feck have I lied about European history? If you believe that you are entitled to hurl insults towards all Europeans and get away with it, you are mistaken. It's actually racist but it's also historically inaccurate. You are confusing populations and yes the Europeans I mentioned like the French and the Greeks as soon as they commanded their own fates and fortunes granted rights to the Jews as if they were their own brothers, rights that the Jews do not grant them back 2 centuries later. This means that you are the one who cannot go on denying history and current reality just because you feel erroneously entitled to some special victim status.

Europe during feudalism was a shit place to be for everyone not just the Jews and If one counts all the historical persecutions of Greeks, the list could be endless, from the wiping off whole towns in the ancient times, in the medieval times, in modern times. Greek history is ripe with such stories.

Jews were repeatedly treated as a foreign parasite in Europe.

A lot of people have repeatedly been treated as parasites by foreigners, and a lot of people have been both oppressed and oppressors. Europe and most of the world has moved on, what about the Jewish state of Israel? Effectively the present is the only thing that actually matters.

Yes it is. It includes the word "order" and also specifies the conditions of it

On the basis of these considerations, the State must decide, with appropriate speed, whether it can enable the petitioners, within the framework of the law, to build a house for themselves within the bounds of the Katzir communal settlement.

This is giving the state a choice, whether is a very specific term. But it's ok, you are not expected to admit to this, but I will also highlight this for the rest.

The fact is that only reality matters, and the reality is that neither Christians nor Muslims enjoy in Israel the civil rights that Jews enjoy in Europe.

Again, the whole thing is rather messy. It does show however that the governments of the area care a lot about what happens inside it.

First of all, it does not matter how messy intra-religious disputes in a church are, this is not a matter of concern for the State of Israel. The only thing that is a matter of concern is that the Greek Archbishop of Jerusalem confirmed by the Holy Catholic & Apostolic Church, the State of Greece and Jordan was not recognized by Israel. This is dodgy and there is no escaping the fact.

Second, but utterly irrelevant as internal Greek church affairs are none of your business, you should read that report and you will realize how dodgy and messy things do get in Israel and that by hook or by crook, Israel tried to wrestle property away from the Church and undermine its leadership. Totally inappropriate behavior in this day and age, the exoneration of Ireneos is quite irrelevant to all that.

In 2005, then-Patriarch Irenaios sparked outrage within the Church after he reportedly sold some of its land to a group of Israeli investors.

The clergy was incensed that the Patriarch would sell Church land, and the Arab laity even more so, because they left that their land had been sold to Israelis. In response, the Holy Synod stripped Patriarch Irenaios of his position, replacing him with the current Patriarch, Theophilos III.

This began a difficult two-year stretch for the Church. Besides the controversy within the Church, external problems surfaced as well.

The Israeli government refused to recognize Irenaios’s removal, citing the need for government approval for the action. By the same token, it refused to confirm Patriarch Theophilos as Irenaios’s successor. Some accusations said figures in the Israeli government blocked the Patriarchate’s recognition in order to gain valuable church properties.

As Patriarch Theophilos labored to restore the Church to its previous calm, he was challenged with a government freeze of the Patriarchate’s bank accounts, the funds of which were needed for maintaining the holy places and the Patriarchate’s school system.

The following year, the Israeli government refused to renew visas for many of the Greek clergy, which would have necessitated their exodus from Israel.

Whom have the Jews ever overwhelmed and consumed ?

According to their own accounts, the Jews boast of killing 500,000 Greeks in Cyprus.

[Lightman]

Noemon, you literally made up mass expulsions of Greeks from France, Italy, and Spain - all places that never expelled Greeks en masse but did expell Jews - to bolster some ridiculous claim that Jews and Greeks were equally persecuted throughout European history. It's fantasy.

[noemon]

I made it up?

What the feck are you talking about? I gave you real historical examples of Greeks being massacred, pogromed and eventually expelled en mass.

Cyprus, Corsica, Constantinople, Soviet Russia, Turkey, Egypt, Toronto, Nebraska, Corinth and these are off the top of my own head, there are countless other examples. There are forced conversions, forced name changes, historical vilification, literary, cultural, ethnic & religious insults. Somehow all that is a different historical experience in your fantasy but quantification of pain is inherently ridiculous and inappropriate and speaks about your character rather than anything else. You are effectively saying: "My pain was greater and more noble than yours" and what am I supposed to make of and with this fantastical claim? Congratulate you for considering yourself worthier of pity than me?

You have failed to address any of the arguments and questions posed to you. At the end of the day, I don't care how special you feel about yourself, the only thing I care about is your ridiculous blanket insults which have been trashed, as well as your refusal to address the present day discrimination of Christians & Muslims by Jews in Israel. Unlike you I have not collectively blamed the Jews for anything, you are the one blaming people here while at the same time refusing to hold up a mirror. Your denial is obvious and bare.

[wat0n]

This is giving the state a choice, whether is a very specific term. But it's ok, you are not expected to admit to this, but I will also highlight this for the rest.

Not really, particularly because it is forcing the State to make a reevaluation taking into account the aspects mentioned in the rest of the paragraph 40 of the ruling. The State is not getting a choice on whether it can take religion or ethnicity into account in the analysis: It can't.

The fact is that only reality matters, and the reality is that neither Christians nor Muslims enjoy in Israel the civil rights that Jews enjoy in Europe.

Yes, reality matters which is why it must be considered what the Israeli jurisprudence on these matters is.

First of all, it does not matter how messy intra-religious disputes in a church are, this is not a matter of concern for the State of Israel. The only thing that is a matter of concern is that the Greek Archbishop of Jerusalem confirmed by the Holy Catholic & Apostolic Church, the State of Greece and Jordan was not recognized by Israel. This is dodgy and there is no escaping the fact.

Why is it a concern for Greece and Jordan but not for Israel?

Second, but utterly irrelevant as internal Greek church affairs are none of your business, you should read that report and you will realize how dodgy and messy things do get in Israel and that by hook or by crook, Israel tried to wrestle property away from the Church and undermine its leadership. Totally inappropriate behavior in this day and age, the exoneration of Ireneos is quite irrelevant to all that.

The PA investigated the issue and it found no wrongdoing on Iraneios' part. Sorry, but no.

[ArtAllm]

If the state of Jews does not recognize the concept of egalitarianism for Christians and Muslims, on what grounds does it claim it for itself in Christian and Muslim countries?

Very good point, and precisely for that reason Zionists stick to the term "Anti-Semitism", which is a linguistic fraud and a misnomer, invented by an ignorant and dishonest journalist Marr who was a Jew - Worshipper, he was a shill who pretended to be a Jew- Hater.

Muslims are hated because of Islam, Christians are hated because of Christianity.

Neither Islam nor Christianity is a race, so the hate against Muslims or Christians is not racism.

But Jews are supposedly hated because of their "Semitism", not because of Judaism, and that is racism, because you cannot do anything about your alleged "Semitism", you are born a "Semite" and you supposedly cannot change it, like a black African cannot change is skin colour.

So the hate against Semites is something irrational, and that is the reason why Zionists insist that if you do not love Judaism or Zionism, then you are an "Anti-Semite", speak a racist.


But if you read the Korherr Report, you will find out that the National Socialists talked about millions of Jews who converted to Christianity and millions of Christians who converted to Judaism.

They do not use the term "Semites" at all, you will not find the word "Semite" in this important document!!!

They talk about "Glaubensjuden" (Religious Jews who looked like other Europeans, and supposedly converted to Judaism) and "Blutjuden" (Jews who did not look like Europeans and who were supposedly the "real" or Blood-Jews).

If you read this report, you will find out that the National Socialists were not sure how to count Jews and who is a Jew, and Shlomo Sand mentions this fact in his book "The invention of the Jewish people".

Mark Rigg writes in his book "Hitler's Jewish soldiers" that about 150 000 men who would today get the right to "return" to Israel served in the German Wehrmacht, including high ranking officers, personally decorated by Hitler.

How can you explain that if you stick to the term "Anti-Semitism"?

It does not matter what the Nazi's allegedly did, the fact is that the Nazis institutionally persecuted Jews in Germany and Europe, this persecution needs to be described somehow with a term, and since antisemitism is the mainstream term....

Where Jews persecuted because of their "Semitism"?

BTW, Germans were institutionally persecuted in Poland, the SU and other countries, before, during, and even after WWII, but nobody talks about it, no new terms were invented to describe the anti - German hate propaganda that began before WWI and is still going on.

Japanese were institutionally persecutes in the USA, but they did not use special fraudulent terms to describe this phenomenon, because they never talk about it.

And what about the Palestinian Semites? Are they not institutionally persecuted since the creation of Israel?

[noemon]

Yes, reality matters which is why it must be considered what the Israeli jurisprudence on these matters is.

Sure:

"The Basic Law: Israel Lands" establishes the principle that Israel Lands are nationally owned, and they can only be leased, not sold. So land buyers are granted only lessee's rights, formally not full ownership rights. Based on this law and several other laws Israel Land Administration was created in 1960. It's an organization supervising the proper use of lands in the public domain and managing some 93% of Israeli lands.

Starting from the beginning of the 2000s there is an ongoing debate including governmental officials whether different issues arising from the national ownership of the land can be solved. On July 12, 2003 and on February 4, 2004 the Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee met as the committee for the Constitution by Broad Consensus to discuss this problem.[1]

One basic issue was the difference in the rights of Jewish citizens and non-Jewish citizens. Palestinians could not purchase land in most Jewish areas. Nor could Palestinians expand their villages as population growth demanded, but Jewish villages could readily expand as needed. These issues have not been addressed in the land reform discussions.

The PA investigated the issue and it found no wrongdoing on Iraneios' part. Sorry, but no.

So you do not find anything wrong in this behavior and this is absolutely fine to be done to your synagogues in Europe?

In 2005, then-Patriarch Irenaios sparked outrage within the Church after he reportedly sold some of its land to a group of Israeli investors.

The clergy was incensed that the Patriarch would sell Church land, and the Arab laity even more so, because they left that their land had been sold to Israelis. In response, the Holy Synod stripped Patriarch Irenaios of his position, replacing him with the current Patriarch, Theophilos III.

This began a difficult two-year stretch for the Church. Besides the controversy within the Church, external problems surfaced as well.

The Israeli government refused to recognize Irenaios’s removal, citing the need for government approval for the action. By the same token, it refused to confirm Patriarch Theophilos as Irenaios’s successor. Some accusations said figures in the Israeli government blocked the Patriarchate’s recognition in order to gain valuable church properties.

As Patriarch Theophilos labored to restore the Church to its previous calm, he was challenged with a government freeze of the Patriarchate’s bank accounts, the funds of which were needed for maintaining the holy places and the Patriarchate’s school system.

The following year, the Israeli government refused to renew visas for many of the Greek clergy, which would have necessitated their exodus from Israel.