U.S. Soldiers Plotted to Kill The President

[Burgomeister of Troll Town]

I just like pretending I have Tourette's.

F&$@!

[Kryzbyn]

Unintended consequences!!

Yeah, I probably should make better use of the reply feature to minimize collateral damage.
My apologies for the perceived slight Aux.

[Burgomeister of Troll Town]

Donkeylickers!

(Edited)

[Kryzbyn]

Barbara Streisand!

Wow that got past the filter!!

[Auxmaulous]

NP Kryz, i'll tone down my usual rhetoric and focus on fine tuning my signal vs noise ratio.

Freehold DM wrote:

It seems as if you have already made up your mind.

I haven't made up my mind - I do know that extremism of any kind is a serious problem.

-

People hoarding ammo or buying guns because of fear of coming possible bans - Not Extremism.

People being upset about the Constitution not being upheld, about the sovereign power of our nation fading (be it border security, debt, world influence, whatever) - Not Extremism.

People being concerned about the disappearing middle class (both sides fear this but it’s lately been espoused more on the left than on the right) - Not Extremism.

People on the right or left plotting to overthrow the gov't, undermine the economic system , spreading chaos or terror or motivating people to action based upon these goals or to exercise racism - Dangerous Extremism.

I know that these groups exist, what I am saying is that by this reports own admission there were no tangible threats at the time it was written, and very little concrete action (on the part of right wingers) since.

[thejeff]

So the government shouldn't be concerned about groups talking about hate, talking about getting military training and recruiting from the military, groups that consider the president illegitimate and talk about 2nd amendment solutions? Shouldn't monitor such groups, within legal limits of course? Shouldn't investigate until you know they are plotting "to overthrow the gov't, undermine the economic system , spreading chaos or terror or motivating people to action based upon these goals or to exercise racism"?
Of course, how do you know they're plotting unless you investigate?

The document in question wasn't an "OMIGOD the right-wingers are all horrible violent people planning to kill us all!!!!!!". It was a study of groups that might become problems and of warning signs to look for. Some of them seem on first glance to be broad, but you're looking for patterns and that's where you start. You find groups that match the patterns and take them to extremes and you investigate them more closely.

Given that one of the things it warned of was precisely the scenario in this case and that it was attacked by the right for doing so, it seems odd to dismiss the report again now.

[Charlie Bell]

Lord Snow wrote:

the U.S, as well as many other countries around the world, have recently been or are currently engaged in much more serious international crimes than Israel is (go ahead and check the internet for number of civilian casualties in Iraq, then check the numbers in the Gaza strip.

Right on to most of your post, but I feel I should address this. Of all the civilian deaths in Iraq, only 12% were caused by Coalition forces, let alone US forces. The overwhelming majority were caused by extrajudicial executions and suicide bombings. Link. Collateral damage does not equal international crimes. Actual war crimes by US forces have been and continue to be punished by US courts.

[Charlie Bell]

thejeff wrote:

The document in question wasn't an "OMIGOD the right-wingers are all horrible violent people planning to kill us all!!!!!!". It was a study of groups that might become problems and of warning signs to look for. Some of them seem on first glance to be broad, but you're looking for patterns and that's where you start. You find groups that match the patterns and take them to extremes and you investigate them more closely.

Aaaaand that's how you justify racial profiling. How about investigating people who are actually doing illegal stuff instead?

[Paul Watson]

Charlie Bell wrote:

thejeff wrote:

The document in question wasn't an "OMIGOD the right-wingers are all horrible violent people planning to kill us all!!!!!!". It was a study of groups that might become problems and of warning signs to look for. Some of them seem on first glance to be broad, but you're looking for patterns and that's where you start. You find groups that match the patterns and take them to extremes and you investigate them more closely.

Aaaaand that's how you justify racial profiling. How about investigating people who are actually doing illegal stuff instead?

I think tejeff's point is that until you investigate, how do you know they're doing anything illegal?

[thejeff]

Charlie Bell wrote:

thejeff wrote:

The document in question wasn't an "OMIGOD the right-wingers are all horrible violent people planning to kill us all!!!!!!". It was a study of groups that might become problems and of warning signs to look for. Some of them seem on first glance to be broad, but you're looking for patterns and that's where you start. You find groups that match the patterns and take them to extremes and you investigate them more closely.

Aaaaand that's how you justify racial profiling. How about investigating people who are actually doing illegal stuff instead?

Profiling by behavior is the exact opposite of racial profiling.

[Comrade Anklebiter]

Charlie Bell wrote:

Right on to most of your post, but I feel I should address this. Of all the civilian deaths in Iraq, only 12% were caused by Coalition forces, let alone US forces. The overwhelming majority were caused by extrajudicial executions and suicide bombings. Link. Collateral damage does not equal international crimes. Actual war crimes by US forces have been and continue to be punished by US courts.

But what they lack in quantity they make up for in quality.

Haditha

Ishanqi

Hamandia

[thejeff]

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Charlie Bell wrote:

Right on to most of your post, but I feel I should address this. Of all the civilian deaths in Iraq, only 12% were caused by Coalition forces, let alone US forces. The overwhelming majority were caused by extrajudicial executions and suicide bombings. Link. Collateral damage does not equal international crimes. Actual war crimes by US forces have been and continue to be punished by US courts.

But what they lack in quantity they make up for in quality.

Haditha

Ishanqi

Hamandia

Actually most civilian deaths in Iraq were due to the breakdown in civil order and society caused by the US invasion and its botched handling. As the occupying power the US was responsible for maintaining order and safety of the population, despite the legal fiction of handing power over a hand-picked Iraqi government. We failed that responsibility horribly.

Civilian deaths over and above what would have been expected without the invasion were roughly an order of magnitude above those documented in that article. Note that I am not saying that US troops deliberately murdered anywhere near that many people. Nor am I excusing the extrajudicial killings or bombings. Just that all of that is a direct result of the invasion and the incompetent ideological approach to trying to run Iraq. Particularly in the early years, which set the stage for what followed.

Further, as Comrade Goblin's links show, war crimes may be tried in US courts, but punishment is another question. The trials have been slow, convictions rare and punishments light. This is not unexpected when a military is investigating itself.

[LazarX]

Lord Snow wrote:

And yes, since Israel's founders chose to side with America rather than Russia back in '48, when the cold war was going, America has been supporting Israel, assuming the role of patronage, in exchange for a foothold in the middle east.

To be fully honest, you didn't really have much of a choice in the matter. Modern Israel was essentially an Anglo-American creation of a proxy state to shepherd Western interests in the Middle East, mainly our access to cheap oil. So was the establishment of all those little shiekdoms from Kuwait to Yemen which holds access to the majority of the black gold found there. Just as Egypt was Russia's proxy, you were ours. That's the definition of geopolitics, chess played superpower style.

Back in the days before Israel was made a state, folks like Menahem Begin (I never can spell that name right) were lobbing bombs at the British just as the Palestinians were lobbing bombs at you. For pretty much the same reasons.

[Comrade Anklebiter]

thejeff wrote:

Actually most civilian deaths in Iraq were due to the breakdown in civil order and society caused by the US invasion and its botched handling. As the occupying power the US was responsible for maintaining order and safety of the population, despite the legal fiction of handing power over a hand-picked Iraqi government. We failed that responsibility horribly.

And wasn't that hand-picked government running death squads from out of the Interior Ministry? Wouldn't that be similar to the Nazis claiming they weren't responsible for the einsatzgruppen? I mean, not to Godwin it or anything.

[thejeff]

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Actually most civilian deaths in Iraq were due to the breakdown in civil order and society caused by the US invasion and its botched handling. As the occupying power the US was responsible for maintaining order and safety of the population, despite the legal fiction of handing power over a hand-picked Iraqi government. We failed that responsibility horribly.

And wasn't that hand-picked government running death squads from out of the Interior Ministry? Wouldn't that be similar to the Nazis claiming they weren't responsible for the einsatzgruppen? I mean, not to Godwin it or anything.

More like Nazi's claiming no responsibility for atrocities committed by Vichy France, since they were independent. Despite German troops and secret police all over the place.

[Comrade Anklebiter]

Or like the Israelis at Sabra and Shatila?

Boy, this is fun.

[BigNorseWolf]

Back on topic, what the hell do people expect?

If the president actually was a Kenyan born muslim sleeper agent hell bent on destroying America from within then shooting him would be precisely what those soldiers swore to do.

This is the narrative the right has been pushing for years. Are we really supposed to be surprised that people actually believe them?

[Comrade Anklebiter]

I was under the mistaken belief that the einsatzgruppen were formed solely from non-Germans, but wikipedia disabuses me of that notion.

But I like Comrade Jeff's alternate Godwin.

[LazarX]

thejeff wrote:

Actually most civilian deaths in Iraq were due to the breakdown in civil order and society caused by the US invasion and its botched handling. As the occupying power the US was responsible for maintaining order and safety of the population, despite the legal fiction of handing power over a hand-picked Iraqi government. We failed that responsibility horribly.

The invasion went over quite smoothly. It was what happened afterward that screwed everything up.

There was a tacit agreement that the United States would not seek to disband the Iraqi military structure. In return the military essentially walked off the battlefield. And would function as an interim public security apparatus

However other policy wonks made the decision to breakup and fire the Iraqi military simultaneously ending any structure to maintain order and putting a whole bunch of young, and justifiably angry men out of work. Men with access to guns and other equipment. Social order completely broke down leading to incidents such as the looting of one of the most important museums in that part of the planet. The whole stinking mess is the result of one catastrophic blunder on our part.

[thejeff]

LazarX wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Actually most civilian deaths in Iraq were due to the breakdown in civil order and society caused by the US invasion and its botched handling. As the occupying power the US was responsible for maintaining order and safety of the population, despite the legal fiction of handing power over a hand-picked Iraqi government. We failed that responsibility horribly.

The invasion went over quite smoothly. It was what happened afterward that screwed everything up.

There was a tacit agreement that the United States would not seek to disband the Iraqi military structure. In return the military essentially walked off the battlefield. And would function as an interim public security apparatus

However other policy wonks made the decision to breakup and fire the Iraqi military simultaneously ending any structure to maintain order and putting a whole bunch of young, and justifiably angry men out of work. Men with access to guns and other equipment. Social order completely broke down leading to incidents such as the looting of one of the most important museums in that part of the planet. The whole stinking mess is the result of one catastrophic blunder on our part.

And the armories.

And the attempt to rebuild Iraq as a libertarian paradise, in the Friedman/Chicago school tradition. Things were actually fairly calm at first as far as security. If Iraqis had actually seen their lives get better then there's a good chance the insurgents wouldn't have gotten hold.

[LazarX]

thejeff wrote:

LazarX wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Actually most civilian deaths in Iraq were due to the breakdown in civil order and society caused by the US invasion and its botched handling. As the occupying power the US was responsible for maintaining order and safety of the population, despite the legal fiction of handing power over a hand-picked Iraqi government. We failed that responsibility horribly.

The invasion went over quite smoothly. It was what happened afterward that screwed everything up.

There was a tacit agreement that the United States would not seek to disband the Iraqi military structure. In return the military essentially walked off the battlefield. And would function as an interim public security apparatus

However other policy wonks made the decision to breakup and fire the Iraqi military simultaneously ending any structure to maintain order and putting a whole bunch of young, and justifiably angry men out of work. Men with access to guns and other equipment. Social order completely broke down leading to incidents such as the looting of one of the most important museums in that part of the planet. The whole stinking mess is the result of one catastrophic blunder on our part.

And the armories

And the attempt to rebuild Iraq as a libertarian paradise, in the Friedman/Chicago school tradition. Things were actually fairly calm at first as far as security. If Iraqis had actually seen their lives get better then there's a good chance the insurgents wouldn't have gotten hold.

Imagine if everyone in the United States military were handed their walking papers... At once.... And without anything such as unemployment concentration or welfare. Tell me how long you think order would last. Especially if such were done on the aegis of a foreign power.

.

[thejeff]

LazarX wrote:

thejeff wrote:

And the armories

And the attempt to rebuild Iraq as a libertarian paradise, in the Friedman/Chicago school tradition. Things were actually fairly calm at first as far as security. If Iraqis had actually seen their lives get better then there's a good chance the insurgents wouldn't have gotten hold.

Imagine if everyone in the United States military were handed their walking papers... At once.... And without anything such as unemployment concentration or welfare. Tell me how long you think order would last. Especially if such were done on the aegis of a foreign power.

.

I'm not disagreeing, just adding another part. Having essentially no government, devastated infrastructure, everything being privatized under that foreign power and foreigners being brought in to do any reconstruction that was actually happening.

[Kryzbyn]

Wow, I may have to go see that Obama's America movie jsut to see all the crazy in it. Some of these theories are Coast to Coast AM worthy!

[Sanakht Inaros]

LazarX wrote:

Lord Snow wrote:

And yes, since Israel's founders chose to side with America rather than Russia back in '48, when the cold war was going, America has been supporting Israel, assuming the role of patronage, in exchange for a foothold in the middle east.

To be fully honest, you didn't really have much of a choice in the matter. Modern Israel was essentially an Anglo-American creation of a proxy state to shepherd Western interests in the Middle East, mainly our access to cheap oil. So was the establishment of all those little shiekdoms from Kuwait to Yemen which holds access to the majority of the black gold found there. Just as Egypt was Russia's proxy, you were ours. That's the definition of geopolitics, chess played superpower style.

Back in the days before Israel was made a state, folks like Menahem Begin (I never can spell that name right) were lobbing bombs at the British just as the Palestinians were lobbing bombs at you. For pretty much the same reasons.

It wasn't anglo-american but very british. Zionism was first proposed during the turbulent break between Luther and the Catholic church. German anti-semitism was also born from Luther's Jews and Their Lies. It didn't gain traction until the early 1800's in britian. Jews themselves didn't start looking at re-establishing the state of Israel until the mid-1880's, and even then they were talking more about settling in South America. It wasn't until the 1890's/early 1900's that they really started looking at Palestine. Millenial dispensationalists were the driving force behind the creation of Israel because they believe that it would begin the End of Days.

[LazarX]

Sanakht Inaros wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Lord Snow wrote:

And yes, since Israel's founders chose to side with America rather than Russia back in '48, when the cold war was going, America has been supporting Israel, assuming the role of patronage, in exchange for a foothold in the middle east.

To be fully honest, you didn't really have much of a choice in the matter. Modern Israel was essentially an Anglo-American creation of a proxy state to shepherd Western interests in the Middle East, mainly our access to cheap oil. So was the establishment of all those little shiekdoms from Kuwait to Yemen which holds access to the majority of the black gold found there. Just as Egypt was Russia's proxy, you were ours. That's the definition of geopolitics, chess played superpower style.

Back in the days before Israel was made a state, folks like Menahem Begin (I never can spell that name right) were lobbing bombs at the British just as the Palestinians were lobbing bombs at you. For pretty much the same reasons.

It wasn't anglo-american but very british. Zionism was first proposed during the turbulent break between Luther and the Catholic church. German anti-semitism was also born from Luther's Jews and Their Lies. It didn't gain traction until the early 1800's in britian. Jews themselves didn't start looking at re-establishing the state of Israel until the mid-1880's, and even then they were talking more about settling in South America. It wasn't until the 1890's/early 1900's that they really started looking at Palestine. Millenial dispensationalists were the driving force behind the creation of Israel because they believe that it would begin the End of Days.

No they weren't. Modern Israel was the creation of Cold War geopolitical strategy. The desires of apocalypse Christians were purely coincidental.

[BigNorseWolf]

Its the end of the world as we know it, they feel... great!

[yellowdingo]

Urizen wrote:

These aren't citizenry being self-appointed militia men.

These aren't foreigners from the middle east committing jihad in the name of their god.

These are active U.S. soldiers allegedly having access to $87k worth of guns and bomb making materials who also killed a former soldier who had learned of their plot.

Let the conspiracy theorists & 2nd amendment rights arm-chair debaters begin their spin.

And Comrade Anklebiter, commence your politroll jester masquerade in T minus 3 ... 2 ...

What does being US Soldiers have to do with it? I can only assume they are pissed at his decision to govern others irrespective of their consent. Given the obligation of everyone to represent themselves - despite cries of the inconvenience of asking seven billion people what they think they can easily justify their actions under the law and the contempt of the few who govern the many for the same reasons and under the same laws it is inevitable.

[Samnell]

A friend of mine has suggested for years that while the world has a perfectly good reason to want to set up a Jewish homeland after WWII, they really picked the wrong spot. Bavaria was right there, after all.

[yellowdingo]

LazarX wrote:

Sanakht Inaros wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Lord Snow wrote:

And yes, since Israel's founders chose to side with America rather than Russia back in '48, when the cold war was going, America has been supporting Israel, assuming the role of patronage, in exchange for a foothold in the middle east.

To be fully honest, you didn't really have much of a choice in the matter. Modern Israel was essentially an Anglo-American creation of a proxy state to shepherd Western interests in the Middle East, mainly our access to cheap oil. So was the establishment of all those little shiekdoms from Kuwait to Yemen which holds access to the majority of the black gold found there. Just as Egypt was Russia's proxy, you were ours. That's the definition of geopolitics, chess played superpower style.

Back in the days before Israel was made a state, folks like Menahem Begin (I never can spell that name right) were lobbing bombs at the British just as the Palestinians were lobbing bombs at you. For pretty much the same reasons.

It wasn't anglo-american but very british. Zionism was first proposed during the turbulent break between Luther and the Catholic church. German anti-semitism was also born from Luther's Jews and Their Lies. It didn't gain traction until the early 1800's in britian. Jews themselves didn't start looking at re-establishing the state of Israel until the mid-1880's, and even then they were talking more about settling in South America. It wasn't until the 1890's/early 1900's that they really started looking at Palestine. Millenial dispensationalists were the driving force behind the creation of Israel because they believe that it would begin the End of Days.

No they weren't. Modern Israel was the creation of Cold War geopolitical strategy. The desires of apocalypse Christians were purely coincidental.

No...migrations into Palestine predate the formation of Cold war geopolitical strategy - they occur as far back as the jewish regions established in europe. 400,000 were massacred in eastern europe in the 1890s.

In fact the cycle of violence is a recurring one - the massacres/purges of the Jews from the Proms in 1890 - the jewish participation in the armenian massacres in turkey 1910 - the extermination of european jews in the 1930-40s - the jewish terrorism in Palestine to carve out a state - the Israel-Arab Wars...the fact is there is a consistent generational cycle of revenge killings occuring every twenty years as the children of one group of victims became the perpetrators of the next cycle of violence.

Hate and violence and revenge.

[Irontruth]

Sanakht Inaros wrote:

It wasn't anglo-american but very british. Zionism was first proposed during the turbulent break between Luther and the Catholic church. German anti-semitism was also born from Luther's Jews and Their Lies. It didn't gain traction until the early 1800's in britian. Jews themselves didn't start looking at re-establishing the state of Israel until the mid-1880's, and even then they were talking more about settling in South America. It wasn't until the 1890's/early 1900's that they really started looking at Palestine. Millenial dispensationalists were the driving force behind the creation of Israel because they believe that it would begin the End of Days.

German antisemitism goes back further than that. The first victims of the First Crusade were Jews living in the Rhineland, in 1095. Prior to that there were blood libels, forced conversions and mass expulsions.

I'm kind of lost how this involves health care though.

Edit: You could consider it earlier, as Constantine did spend some of his time as a major political figure in Trier, and he made early laws separating Christians from Jews.

[Brox RedGloves]

Burgomeister of Troll Town wrote:

I just like pretending I have Tourette's.

F##@!

F&*^

A$$

Yes, I am a bartender...

[Comrade Anklebiter]

Irontruth wrote:

I'm kind of lost how this involves health care though.

I'm kind of lost how health care has anything to do with US soldiers plotting to assassinate the president.

[meatrace]

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Irontruth wrote:

I'm kind of lost how this involves health care though.

I'm kind of lost how health care has anything to do with US soldiers plotting to assassinate the president.

I think IT has OTD punch-drunkenness. He's fought so hard in so many threads he can't tell them apart anymore.

[Comrade Anklebiter]

Jewish joke circa 1900: A Zionist is someone who wants other Jews to move to Palestine. (Stolen from Gore Vidal)

[Irontruth]

meatrace wrote:

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Irontruth wrote:

I'm kind of lost how this involves health care though.

I'm kind of lost how health care has anything to do with US soldiers plotting to assassinate the president.

I think IT has OTD punch-drunkenness. He's fought so hard in so many threads he can't tell them apart anymore.

TASTES GREAT!

[meatrace]

@IT
Whenever I see your avatar I think of Super Shredder from the end of TMNT 2: The Secret of the Ooze.

[Irontruth]

Shredder wasn't as important in the comics. He's involved, loosely in the origin story, but is dispatched pretty quickly.

[meatrace]

Irontruth wrote:

Shredder wasn't as important in the comics. He's involved, loosely in the origin story, but is dispatched pretty quickly.

Psh. Whatever supernerd. I wasn't talking about the comics I was talking about the movie universe. DUH!

Now that I think of it I really should *ahem* procure some TMNT comics.
I've been tearing through Akira and some old Vertigo stuff (Sandman, et al) now that I have my iPad. 's pretty awesome.

I keep thinking "what comics have I always wanted to read but never did" and 80s Eastman and Laird TMNT with all the dark futurism and dimension-hopping just shot to the top of my want list.

[Irontruth]

It's good, I haven't read a lot of it for a long time, but it holds together much better than the animated series or the movies IMO. Raphael doesn't just seem like an angsty teenager any more. I don't remember much, since it's been over 15 years since I read them... I should get them for my ipad too, but I do remember the dimension/sci-fi stuff, was decent.

I also highly recommend Usagi Yojimbo if you haven't read those. His simple style is amazing imo (I'm not a big comic aficionado), his stories and characters are awesome. Plus he incorporates Japanese history and mythology into his stories.

I'm still not sure what comics have to do with fixes to the monk class though.

[A Man In Black]

Usagi Yojimbo is excellent but unrelated to TMNT other than cameoing a time or two. Eastman and Laird are just huge fans of Stan Sakai.

Also, not related to crazy people.

[Sanakht Inaros]

LazarX wrote:

Sanakht Inaros wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Lord Snow wrote:

And yes, since Israel's founders chose to side with America rather than Russia back in '48, when the cold war was going, America has been supporting Israel, assuming the role of patronage, in exchange for a foothold in the middle east.

To be fully honest, you didn't really have much of a choice in the matter. Modern Israel was essentially an Anglo-American creation of a proxy state to shepherd Western interests in the Middle East, mainly our access to cheap oil. So was the establishment of all those little shiekdoms from Kuwait to Yemen which holds access to the majority of the black gold found there. Just as Egypt was Russia's proxy, you were ours. That's the definition of geopolitics, chess played superpower style.

Back in the days before Israel was made a state, folks like Menahem Begin (I never can spell that name right) were lobbing bombs at the British just as the Palestinians were lobbing bombs at you. For pretty much the same reasons.

It wasn't anglo-american but very british. Zionism was first proposed during the turbulent break between Luther and the Catholic church. German anti-semitism was also born from Luther's Jews and Their Lies. It didn't gain traction until the early 1800's in britian. Jews themselves didn't start looking at re-establishing the state of Israel until the mid-1880's, and even then they were talking more about settling in South America. It wasn't until the 1890's/early 1900's that they really started looking at Palestine. Millenial dispensationalists were the driving force behind the creation of Israel because they believe that it would begin the End of Days.

No they weren't. Modern Israel was the creation of Cold War geopolitical strategy. The desires of apocalypse Christians were purely coincidental.

Actually, it was very religious driven. It was very biblically based and pushed. Religion drove the geo-political dealings. Go back and read the literature and see for yourself. The original jewish plan was to settle in an area of Argentina.

[Comrade Anklebiter]

I was under the impression that Herzl and others had considered Argentina (and Uganda) as possible alternatives, but the preferred destination had always been Palestine.

I had also always thought that Zionism was a pretty secular movement.

I had also also always thought that the geopolitical dealings (or, as I prefer to call them, imperialist schemes) to carve up the Ottoman Empire had been more behind the Balfour Declaration than religion, but I only know a little about the origins of Zionism.

[Sanakht Inaros]

Zionism is all about bringing about biblical prophecy, in that Christ will return to the world only when the Jews have returned to the perceived historical boundaries of Israel. It began in the early 1800's in Britian and moved to the U.S. and then back to Europe. Argentina was the original goal. I was really surprised too once I started looking into it.

Edited to add: Herzl actually wanted to include the arabs, muslims, and etc...into the Israeli state, once they decided on Palestine.

[Comrade Anklebiter]

Well, that obviously can't be the reason that the Jewish (it feels weird to qualify) Zionist movement caught on.

Are your sources indicating that Herzel and co. got the idea from Christian Zionists?

[Urizen]

Sanakht Inaros wrote:

Actually, it was very religious driven. It was very biblically based and pushed. Religion drove the geo-political dealings. Go back and read the literature and see for yourself. The original jewish plan was to settle in an area of Argentina.

... until some Nazis got a bright idea to flee to Argentina and Paraguay.

[Sanakht Inaros]

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Well, that obviously can't be the reason that the Jewish (it feels weird to qualify) Zionist movement caught on.

Are your sources indicating that Herzel and co. got the idea from Christian Zionists?

For Herzl and Co., the idea came from the British. They received more support if they went back to the Middle East. Even now, evangelical christians have a lot of pull with the Israeli government. There was a poll in Israel a couple of years ago that showed that majority of both Israelis and Palestinians agreed that going back to the 1967 borders would go a long way to bringing about peace. But it never got any play over here. If you listen to those on the right, you keep hearing how bad it would be to do so.

Right now, I've put my research on pause cause school justed started back up and I have papers to write.

[Sanakht Inaros]

Urizen wrote:

Sanakht Inaros wrote:

Actually, it was very religious driven. It was very biblically based and pushed. Religion drove the geo-political dealings. Go back and read the literature and see for yourself. The original jewish plan was to settle in an area of Argentina.

... until some Nazis got a bright idea to flee to Argentina and Paraguay.

Except the Jews dropped the idea long before the Nazi's were ever even dreamed of.

[Urizen]

Sanakht Inaros wrote:

Urizen wrote:

Sanakht Inaros wrote:

Actually, it was very religious driven. It was very biblically based and pushed. Religion drove the geo-political dealings. Go back and read the literature and see for yourself. The original jewish plan was to settle in an area of Argentina.

... until some Nazis got a bright idea to flee to Argentina and Paraguay.

Except the Jews dropped the idea long before the Nazi's were ever even dreamed of.

Those augurers!

[Comrade Anklebiter]

From Herzl's The Jewish State:

PALESTINE OR ARGENTINE?

Spoiler:

Shall we choose Palestine or Argentine? We shall take what is given us, and what is selected by Jewish public opinion. The Society will determine both these points.

Argentine is one of the most fertile countries in the world, extends over a vast area, has a sparse population and a mild climate. The Argentine Republic would derive considerable profit from the cession of a portion of its territory to us. The present infiltration of Jews has certainly produced some discontent, and it would be necessary to enlighten the Republic on the intrinsic difference of our new movement.

Palestine is our ever-memorable historic home. The very name of Palestine would attract our people with a force of marvelous potency. If His Majesty the Sultan were to give us Palestine, we could in return undertake to regulate the whole finances of Turkey. We should there form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism. We should as a neutral State remain in contact with all Europe, which would have to guarantee our existence. The sanctuaries of Christendom would be safeguarded by assigning to them an extra-territorial status such as is well-known to the law of nations. We should form a guard of honor about these sanctuaries, answering for the fulfillment of this duty with our existence. This guard of honor would be the great symbol of the solution of the Jewish question after eighteen centuries of Jewish suffering.

Is there an original Jewish plan earlier than Herzl?

[Comrade Anklebiter]

Fans of The Difference Engine will be surprised (or not) to learn that Laurence Oliphant was an early supporter.