Israeli Terror State expands Land theft operation - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the nations of the Middle East.

Moderator: PoFo Middle-East Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum moderated in English, so please post in English only. Thank you.
User avatar
By Nets
#1420378
Sploop. The whole point of the two state solution which both parties have endorsed is that there will be two states for two peoples, Israel for the Jewish people and Palestine for the Palestinian Arab people. To demand a right of return to Israel proper is a negation of the two state solution and is obviously unacceptable to the Israeli people.

Having said that....I am not unopposed to restitution to the Palestinians who fled for their property (some 700,000 people), provided this is weighed against restitution to Israel for the Jewish refugees they absorbed from Arab lands who came in a situation equally as miserable as the Arabs who fled (Jews refugees = 800,000-900,000).

I would even support a state apology from Israel and a "symbolic" return of 20,000-30,000 refugees to Israel proper, provided the Arab States (particularly Syria and the Gulf States) had to acknowledge their equally awful role in creating the "refugee problem".

War Angel makes a good point, the Arab Nation has 22 states (before Palestine), while we Jews only have tiny Israel.

Two States for Two Peoples. Peace.

[P.S. Yes, the Arab/Palestinians will never forget, but keep in mind Jews have long memories of grievances as well. Anti-Zionists act like it is Holocaust,Holocaust,Holocaust --- while in reality it is so much more. We still curse the Greeks for occupying our land. and that was 23 centuries ago! We waited patiently 2000 years for Israel, 60 years for the Palestinian Arabs is nothing]
By Maas
#1420647
Done. Lebanon should absorb them (It's been 60 fucking years, damnit!), or Jordan maybe, or Egypt... but why Israel?! You want the ONLY Jewish country on Earth to look out for Arabs, who've got over two dozen countries?! That's outrageously moronic.

Looking out for the Palestinians like a class of childeren?
You got a superiority complex. :roll:

[P.S. Yes, the Arab/Palestinians will never forget, but keep in mind Jews have long memories of grievances as well. Anti-Zionists act like it is Holocaust,Holocaust,Holocaust --- while in reality it is so much more. We still curse the Greeks for occupying our land. and that was 23 centuries ago! We waited patiently 2000 years for Israel, 60 years for the Palestinian Arabs is nothing]

Like the British would say: get on with it!
This is pointless to keep naming all who once kicked your ass. Half of europe kicked our ass,... we aint complaining.
User avatar
By Nets
#1420699
This is pointless to keep naming all who once kicked your ass. Half of europe kicked our ass,... we aint complaining.


You ain't complaining because at the end of the day you have a nice piece of land to call "home".

Don't underestimate that.

Also, there is no comparison between the "Dutch" and "Jewish" historical experiences, completely different.
User avatar
By danholo
#1420967
Does this matter? Lots of countries got minorities. (as far as Palestinians were a minority) They were given a fair say/vote in, not only their own piece of land, but the enitre country of Jordan where they became a part of. That's is a heck of a lot better than what Israel did.


How did "Palestinians" constitute a minority? What is the major ethnicity of Jordan as opposed to Palestine...? :eh: Israel granted full citizenship rights to its Arab constituency as well. The fact that Israel hasn't granted West Bank Arabs Israeli citizenship is, well, another discussion altogether. One, actually, which I am very lousy at. What do you know about it?

And that's how Jordanians looked after them. Which totally conflicts with your idea that they did not.


I was talking about Arabs as a whole, the idea of some sort of Palestinian nation and what were the main motivations behind the Arab states' attack.

flying in food and tents just takes a lot of money and a couple of airplanes. They don't even need to land. Actually building houses and streets... that takes a labour force. So where does that labour force come from? Say you find 100 people.


Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarem, Ramallah, Bethlehem, Hebron, Gaza City, Jabalyah... You name it. Are you saying that Palestinians are incapable of work and unskilled in construction? What do you take them for? As far as I'm concerned, Palestinians happen to be one of the more educated and literate out of all Arabs so I'm pretty sure they can get a couple of buildings up and running.

But, actually, Palestinian cities do not have tents. They are composed of permanently built structures, have paved roads and other necessary infrastructural parts required for basic or even luxurious living. As a matter of fact, all Palestinian "refugee" camps, which just happen to be a slummed extension of major Palestinian population centers, have been built out of stone, not wood.

How many houses could they build? Is that fast enough or do you need 1500 people? And when the job is finished... where do you find work for those 1500 skilled people?


I don't know. What did Jordan do for its own refugees during its rule of the West Bank? As far as I know, those Palestinians who fled to what I'd call "Jordan proper" have been absorbed into its host population. This has been easy because Palestinians are Arabs and, well, Jordan was Palestine also.

Or will you let their companies go bankrupt in your own country / crashing the local economy where you just build all them houses. How do you feed the 1500 extra mouths? Where does their equipment come from? How should their materials be shipped to them with no harbour or airport in sight? How can you build a city while people live on that same strip of land with tents?


As I have probably said, I don't know why the refugees have maintained that status this long. Every single refugee problem that has been created in those times has been solved except this respective one. I find it perplexing that you make it sound so difficult... As if Arabs were incapable of solving such a problem themselves when it comes to economic or logistical factors. I mean, [b]isn't charity a basic tenet in Islam[/i]? Also, it is not unlike Palestinian refugees lack funds. Contrary to all other refugees, the Palestinians got their own, personal refugee organization!

Until 1967 every Palestinian refugee camp was located outside of Israel. The Jewish state had no jurisdiction over any Palestinian refugees (frankly, they had a refugee problem of their own; Israel absorbed a population that was exactly the amount of its initial size, absorbing every single one) and their fates were entirely dependent on their own people; Arabs. I guess their prospective desires to return home was more important, and I do understand that, but I find it totally absurd for you to say that anything has changed in the Arab mindset regarding Israel and its existence. Palestinian refugees, and even their offspring, are kept in a prolonged facade that they will return home. Of course, this coincides with many of the wishes of board members here, but I would regard it honest to admit that this idea of "returning home" is more important then their societal well-being.

A good example is Lebanon where Arabs won't even take in their own kind. This has been on-going for decades and what good came out of it? Civil war.

No shit It took my country decades to rebuild what got destroyed in WWII. And that was WITH the help of the Marshall-plan.


Yeah... Political decision making requires an engineering degree and an unequivocal skill in mathematics?

If the Arabs would've got "a crackin'" this problem would've been solved decades ago.

Many?? I wrote some. Roll eyes
And you didn't provide a source did you? Also previously you only claimed "Arab countries" and now you flip flopped to "most Arab countries who attacked Israel".


Well, it is many, so how was my claim "hard to make"?

I didn't flip flop. Maybe I should've been more clear: not all countries played an active role in the "defense of Palestine".

What was I supposed to provide sources for?

About your last claim: it's more like half. Or do you think Egypt was somehow created as well eventhough it existed for thousands of years :eh:


The following was actually totally new to me:

In 1931, following a visit to Egypt, Syrian Arab nationalist Sati' al-Husri remarked that "[Egyptians] did not possess an Arab nationalist sentiment; did not accept that Egypt was a part of the Arab lands, and would not acknowledge that the Egyptian people were part of the Arab nation."[12] The later 1930s would become a formative period for Arab nationalism in Egypt, in large part due to efforts by Syrian/Palestinian/Lebanese intellectuals.[13] Nevertheless, a year after the establishment of the League of Arab States in 1945, to be headquartered in Cairo, Oxford University historian H. S. Deighton was still writing:
“ The Egyptians are not Arabs, and both they and the Arabs are aware of this fact. They are Arabic-speaking, and they are Muslim —indeed religion plays a greater part in their lives than it does in those either of the Syrians or the Iraqi. But the Egyptian, during the first thirty years of the [twentieth] century, was not aware of any particular bond with the Arab East... Egypt sees in the Arab cause a worthy object of real and active sympathy and, at the same time, a great and proper opportunity for the exercise of leadership, as well as for the enjoyment of its fruits. But she is still Egyptian first and Arab only in consequence, and her main interests are still domestic.[14]


I went to Wiki because I was under the impression that Egypt has changed faced many a time in its history, contrary to your claim that "Egypt has existed for thousands of years". I guess I was right but I don't know how it supports my argument.
User avatar
By Gletkin
#1421450
danholo wrote:Again, this is another ruse created so empty land, which is no ones, is attributed as "Palestinian land". According to what, may I ask?

The land was not empty.
And as I've posted elsewhere, they've been there since the time of Hadrian:
However, Jewish communities continued to exist, primarily in the Galilee, the northernmost part of Palestine. Palestine was governed by the Roman Empire until the fourth century A.D. (300's) and then by the Byzantine Empire. In time, Christianity spread to most of Palestine. The population consisted of Jewish converts to Christianity and paganism, peoples imported by the Romans, and others who had probably inhabited Palestine continuously.

During the seventh century (A.D. 600's), Muslim Arab armies moved north from Arabia to conquer most of the Middle East, including Palestine. Jerusalem was conquered about 638 by the Caliph Umar (Omar) who gave his protection to its inhabitants. Muslim powers controlled the region until the early 1900's. The rulers allowed Christians and Jews to keep their religions. However, most of the local population gradually accepted Islam and the Arab-Islamic culture of their rulers. Jerusalem became holy to Muslims as the site where, according to tradition, Muhammed ascended to heaven after a miraculous overnight ride from Mecca on his horse Al-Buraq. The al-Aqsa mosque was built on the site generally regarded as the area of the Jewish temples.


So it's not quite as cut and dried as some people are trying to make it out to be (i.e. Jews=Rightful Owners Returning Home, Arabs=Squatters With No Legitimate Ties To The Land That Arrived More Recently). The Palestinian Arabs are descended in part from those Hebrews who had avoided expulsion and remained in what is now Israel/Palestine.

danholo wrote:Are you talking about the Czechoslovakian army surplus, bullets made out of lipstick shells or that dang loud but defective piece of artillery?

Those were the "legal" weaponry. A good deal of munitions actually came from the USA. The Truman adminstration had placed an arms embargo on Palestine but it was laxly enforced. Huge amounts of arms and ammo were trafficked out of the USA to the Zionist forces in Palestine. Much of it by the famous gangster Meyer Lansky who invoked this as part of his unsuccessful appeal to the Israeli government to avoid extradition back to the USA.


Wow, I didnt know we had ventured into a Klan club party. Amazing how so many people who are for "human rights" and support of the downtrodden are so for everyone - but that of the jews.

Unwillingness to pay foreign aid = "Klan"? Well Iv'e heard worse toward Arabs and Muslims.
Conversely, it's amazing how many people scorn "human rights" and support of the downtrodden as whining and self-pity but make an acception when it comes to Zionist ideology. The idea of slave reparations for example is scoffed at (I don't support it either) but there's no problem with annually sending $2.2 billion in aid to a nation the size of Massachusetts.....mostly out of sympathy for a horrendous crime that we didn't even commit.

And calling jews vermin is a good way to get a-carded or banned b- get your ass kicked

Calling Jews vermin is unwarranted. But I've heard things just as bad against Arabs and Muslims.

danholo wrote:Jordan is Palestine

Only according to foreign conquerors (the British Empire and maybe the Ottoman as well).
By the same token Kuwait is part of Iraq.
User avatar
By War Angel
#1421613
I just want them to have the option of returning to their homes. What's so moronic about that?

Why? They came here to annihilate the Jewish settlement in the 19th century. They lost the war of 1948. Why on EARTH would we let them back in?! Especially when this isn't their 'home'. Hell, they've probably been to Lebanon longer than they've been here... actually, it's pretty close to certain. They don't want their freaking dumps back, some backwards village in the middle of no-where. They want to end the Jewish state.

Hey, I bet if you offered them enough money to compensate their loss, some of them would probably be happy not to return to the ruins of their bulldozed villages. Why not try that?

They should compensate us, if anything. But hell, we've tried the money deal... they didn't take it. They don't money or land - they want us dead. Our lives are not for the giving.

The land was not empty.

Relatively speaking, it was.

Looking out for the Palestinians like a class of childeren?

You're the one who expects us to give them shit they don't deserve.

You got a superiority complex.

I have no superiority complex. I am simply superior. :)

This is pointless to keep naming all who once kicked your ass. Half of europe kicked our ass,... we aint complaining.

:roll: I'm going to score this one for your ignorance, rather than callousness. You're not seriously suggesting the Holocaust was a mere nothing, that the Dutch (!!) had it the same, or some other drivel, are ye? You are not seriously belittling the magnitude of that tragedy, are you? I certainly hope not. That would be crossing a new line of foolishness.

Huge amounts of arms and ammo were trafficked out of the USA to the Zionist forces in Palestine.

Care to elaborate, my good man? Because that's not what I've seen. Hell, they only had two 20mm cannons for the entire country. Busiest cannons ever. :lol:

The idea of slave reparations for example is scoffed at (I don't support it either) but there's no problem with annually sending $2.2 billion in aid to a nation the size of Massachusetts.....mostly out of sympathy for a horrendous crime that we didn't even commit.

The money the USA gives Israel is not out of sympathy for the Holocaust or anything, really. It's an investment, one you may not agree with on basis of ideology, but still an investment. It's not pity money.

The Palestinian Arabs are descended in part from those Hebrews who had avoided expulsion and remained in what is now Israel/Palestine.

:eek: :eh: Dude, seriously, where are you getting this? That stuff you're obviously smoking, that is. :lol:
User avatar
By Gletkin
#1421725
War Angel wrote:Relatively speaking, it was.

So's the Negev.
So you won't mind if settlers from other lands come to take it away from Israel?

War Angel wrote:Care to elaborate, my good man?

It was a print source long ago. But this is what I could find online on short notice:

http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm
The Arab defeat and the birth of the refugee problem - Despite initial setbacks, better organization and intelligence successes, as well as timely clandestine arms shipments, enabled the Jews to gain a decisive victory.

http://motlc.learningcenter.wiesenthal. ... m2475.html
The Haganah budget was substantially increased, and the purchase of arms was expanded by the emissary of the Haganah, Hayyim Slavin, who concentrated upon the acquisition of machinery to manufacture arms and ammunition from the United States.

War Angel wrote:The money the USA gives Israel is not out of sympathy for the Holocaust or anything, really.

It's how it's sold to the US taxpayer however. Sure the real reasons may be different but when it comes to emotional appeal to justify this aid the Holocaust is constantly evoked.

War Angel wrote:Dude, seriously, where are you getting this? That stuff you're obviously smoking, that is.

I posted a link to and a quote from the source.

Try reading presented evidence first before sponataneously firing off flip ad hominum remarks.
By sploop!
#1422118
Two States for Two Peoples. Peace. NetsNJFan87


Have you ever come across that old problem involving two boys and one cake? the problem is to ensure that both sides get a bit of the cake and go away happy. The solution is that one of the boys takes responsibility for dividing the cake, and the other boy gets first pick of the two pieces. In this way, you can be sure the cake is divided absolutely fairly.

Now my point is this - if you think the cake is being divided fairly, you shouldn't really have any objection to swapping pieces. What's your answer? Don't worry, I know what it is - you wouldn't dream of having Israel based in the land you are suggesting the Palestinians get told is theirs. Why? Because it would be unfair.

From a Palestinian perspective, Israel has been dropped onto their land, and they have been pushed out. Of course they were not going to agree to this in 1948 - why should they? They had their land, and you were the invaders. Now the situation is different. Whether they liked it or not, the land was taken and they were pushed out. And they've been pushed out for 60 years. Maybe there is space for negotiation now.

But, paradoxically, the positions are now reversed. Now it is Israel that feels no need to negotiate. 'Why should we - we have the land, it is ours'. Does this ring any bells? And you know what, that might well be the truth. Israel quite likely will be able to survive without making any effort to be reasonable. And lots of people, danholo, maybe, or War Angel will be quite happy that they can hold their heads up. But I really wonder what the point of Israel might be, and what it might be like to have to live there, if it has to go into the future surrounded by walls and plagued by continual strife.

If Israel is going to negotiate for peace, it needs to do so in good faith. And that probably means actually giving up things you would prefer to keep, and talking to people you would sooner ignore.

As a P.S. I wonder what you think about Bush's claim that 'peace is possible' when a big part of the difficulty is not even invited to sit at the table?
User avatar
By Nets
#1422215
But Sploop in the 1948 case the Cake was split by an independent U.N. Commission. Neither side was happy with the Split, but ultimately the Jews accepted and the Arabs chose war. Too bad, you could have had a much larger Palestine then but you chose war.


As a P.S. I wonder what you think about Bush's claim that 'peace is possible' when a big part of the difficulty is not even invited to sit at the table?


Why would you negotiate with a violent Jihadist group calling for your expulsion. Let Hamas rot in Gaza like the PLO rotted in Tunis and then will come the time for talks.


And as for good faith, Israel withdrew from Gaza in good faith, leaving the hot-houses so some Gazans could salvage the settler economy. Instead, they trashed the hothouses and immediately started launching rockets. No wonder Israelis don't want to leave the West Bank and have rockets fall on Ben Gurion Airport.

Israel made its good faith move --- its there turn.
By Maas
#1422220
(as far as Palestinians were a minority)
How did "Palestinians" constitute a minority? What is the major ethnicity of Jordan as opposed to Palestine...?

Danholo, what are you trying to say.
That you question if the people of Jordan are ethnically the same as Palestinians? That must be one of the most stupidist questions you ever made scine I started out not disputing that. Either way, it doesn't matter. Most europeans are ethnically identical, yet are a minority in eachother countries. I stopped ready right there and than. It's pointless.
By sploop!
#1422789
But Sploop in the 1948 case the Cake was split by an independent U.N. Commission. Neither side was happy with the Split


Ther situation in 1948 was somewhat different, as I suggested in my previous post. And you know, from your side of the wall, the Arabs chose War. From their side, they defended themselves.
User avatar
By danholo
#1422804
So you won't mind if settlers from other lands come to take it away from Israel?


Actually, we would, but nobody is as insane as a Jew when it comes to Israel so it'd likely never happen.

Maas wrote:Danholo, what are you trying to say.
That you question if the people of Jordan are ethnically the same as Palestinians? That must be one of the most stupidist questions you ever made scine I started out not disputing that. Either way, it doesn't matter. Most europeans are ethnically identical, yet are a minority in eachother countries.


I don't know how the Arabs feel about it. Nonetheless, Jordanians, as Palestinians, are Arabs, and it shouldn't have been a problem to resettle all the refugees, as other people's have done with their respective similar problems.

I stopped ready right there and than. It's pointless.


Lost in comprehension?

sploop! wrote:Have you ever come across that old problem involving two boys and one cake? the problem is to ensure that both sides get a bit of the cake and go away happy. The solution is that one of the boys takes responsibility for dividing the cake, and the other boy gets first pick of the two pieces. In this way, you can be sure the cake is divided absolutely fairly.

Now my point is this - if you think the cake is being divided fairly, you shouldn't really have any objection to swapping pieces. What's your answer? Don't worry, I know what it is - you wouldn't dream of having Israel based in the land you are suggesting the Palestinians get told is theirs. Why? Because it would be unfair.

From a Palestinian perspective, Israel has been dropped onto their land, and they have been pushed out. Of course they were not going to agree to this in 1948 - why should they? They had their land, and you were the invaders. Now the situation is different. Whether they liked it or not, the land was taken and they were pushed out. And they've been pushed out for 60 years. Maybe there is space for negotiation now.


I don't think anybody is missing the point here. We are clearly aware of the Palestinan plight and the motives behind their moves. There's a couple of problems with your scenario. You are missing the point of "the other side didn't even accept the idea of division and it just became a fight over the entire cake". Another problem: you, as well as anyone else for one reason or the other, attributes the ownership of the land to either party.

But, paradoxically, the positions are now reversed. Now it is Israel that feels no need to negotiate. 'Why should we - we have the land, it is ours'. Does this ring any bells? And you know what, that might well be the truth. Israel quite likely will be able to survive without making any effort to be reasonable. And lots of people, danholo, maybe, or War Angel will be quite happy that they can hold their heads up. But I really wonder what the point of Israel might be, and what it might be like to have to live there, if it has to go into the future surrounded by walls and plagued by continual strife.


I, honestly, don't know what you are talking about. For you to say this, you have to ignore decades of history. Israel has had negotiations, and even made peace deals, with the conflicting party. Israel and the Palestinians have been in negotiations and almost reached a settlement. Negotiations fell apart, more or less, due to the misgivings of both sides. It quite clearly defined what the crux of the matter is; the issue of compromise is too difficult at this time. Refugees, Jerusalem etc. are issues which are too difficult to solve to make both sides at least a little satisfied.
By Maas
#1423071
I don't know how the Arabs feel about it. Nonetheless, Jordanians, as Palestinians, are Arabs, and it shouldn't have been a problem to resettle all the refugees, as other people's have done with their respective similar problems.

Same thing could be said about Jews who lived in the US but moved to Israel anyways. You can make this in an ethnic thing like some racist would, but it's a cultural thing.

People living on the Dutch-German near the border are the same on both sides of the border. Same thing with the Belgium-Dutch border. Yet People who live at at one of those borders probably would never move to the other border or to the other side of the border, just like I probably would never move from the coastal region to a border. And my country is small as fuck (300 km x 100 km)
Lost in comprehension?

too much of a chance reading more totally pointless questions
User avatar
By danholo
#1423107
Same thing could be said about Jews who lived in the US but moved to Israel anyways. You can make this in an ethnic thing like some racist would, but it's a cultural thing.


I have no idea what you're talking about concerning your odd conclusions.

My point is, if you can't count on your own to help you out when you're not doing that hot, it must really suck. When it comes to Palestinian refugees they are, well, still refugees. That doesn't apply to any refugee crisis created in those times.

People living on the Dutch-German near the border are the same on both sides of the border. Same thing with the Belgium-Dutch border. Yet People who live at at one of those borders probably would never move to the other border or to the other side of the border, just like I probably would never move from the coastal region to a border. And my country is small as fuck (300 km x 100 km)


So what? What does this have to do with them? I really fail to see the connection here, once again.

too much of a chance reading more totally pointless questions


I am sorry for not being meaningful enough for you. :roll:
User avatar
By War Angel
#1423390
So's the Negev.
So you won't mind if settlers from other lands come to take it away from Israel?

The Negev is owned by the State of Israel. The land before 1948 didn't belong to anyone - it was British Mandate. When they left, it became No Man's Land. Then, war came about, and you know the rest. :)

It was a print source long ago. But this is what I could find online on short notice:

Thanks for spotting it, but it still doesn't say how much. If the Jews had so much to fight with in terms of weapons, why the hell did we produce grenades from lipsticks and pieces of plumbing? Why all the bother with other hand-made weapons? Anyway, my resources (i.e, people who actually lived and fought during that time) tell me they barely had anything to fight with, and they even lacked proper man-power. Fresh Holocaust survivors were given rifles, and sent to fight with the shortest of training. Some died with their rifles still locked... it was a glorious, but shitty time to be an Israeli. I wonder when that will stop being the truth. :lol:

It's how it's sold to the US taxpayer however. Sure the real reasons may be different but when it comes to emotional appeal to justify this aid the Holocaust is constantly evoked.

Well, that's just not right. The Holocaust is a major reason for the existence of Israel, but the USA's help is not what's preventing Israel from crumbling, far from it. It's simply an investment - the USA wants Israel to have to the most powerful military in the area, and have an edge over the other nations here. That makes sense to American officials, and that's why they're willing to let go of some money.

Try reading presented evidence first before sponataneously firing off flip ad hominum remarks.

What you posted was a big-ass article, and I really couldn't be arsed to look for hints on Israelis and Palestinian Arabs having some ethnic connection. I'm not saying it's impossible - just extremely unlikely. The two groups had only several decades to mingle with one another, and I doubt they did, seeing as their wasn't exactly great friendship between them.

Have you ever come across that old problem involving two boys and one cake?

How about the one with the two boys, the one cake, and the lady who told them to share? One of the kids agreed, the other didn't, and started a fight over it. He got his arse handed to him, but instead of buggering off back home, he stuck around for 60 years and whined, refusing any offer to share some of the cake, wanting only all of it?
By Maas
#1423443
So what? What does this have to do with them? I really fail to see the connection here, once again.

You failt to see the connection because you only see racial issues. Racially, Dutch people are the same as Belgiums and Germans, yet we hardly ever mix. It's purely a cultural thing. My country is just 100 km by 300 km. And even we don;t mix with our selves.

The southern people are on average 2 cm smaller than other Dutch people. They also celebrate carnaval :roll: . Them people... they live in The Netherlands. But unlike the south, north and eastern pasts: I say I'm from Holland.


In that same way it could be that Palestinians never will became Jordanians. Just like it's a snowballs change is hell I'll be celebrating carnaval.
User avatar
By ArtAllm
#1423656
The Palestinian Arabs are descended in part from those Hebrews who had avoided expulsion and remained in what is now Israel/Palestine.
-------
War Angel:
Dude, seriously, where are you getting this? That stuff you're obviously smoking, that is.


Well, this is what scientists say, though it may contradict the mythology of the Bible Stories.

Most modern Jews are converts and stem from Khazars, Arabs, Berbers, Greeks, Slavs, etc. etc.

Judaism is a religion, not a race.
By sploop!
#1423666
The land before 1948 didn't belong to anyone - it was British Mandate. When they left, it became No Man's Land. Then, war came about, and you know the rest. War Angel


Clearly wrong. The land, the buildings on it (now bulldozed and buried), the livestock (stolen), the businesses all belonged to the people living there. The Mandate, the apparent lack of a state is irrelevant - these are all political mechanisms that have nothing to do with the reality that there were people living on that land, and Israel bullied them (and continues to bully them) off of it. Why do you continue to lie so blatantly, War Angel?
User avatar
By ArtAllm
#1423688
The land, the buildings on it (now bulldozed and buried), the livestock (stolen), the businesses all belonged to the people living there. The Mandate, the apparent lack of a state is irrelevant - these are all political mechanisms that have nothing to do with the reality that there were people living on that land, and Israel bullied them (and continues to bully them) off of it. Why do you continue to lie so blatantly, War Angel?


Fully agree with you.
User avatar
By danholo
#1423696
Clearly wrong. The land, the buildings on it (now bulldozed and buried), the livestock (stolen), the businesses all belonged to the people living there. The Mandate, the apparent lack of a state is irrelevant - these are all political mechanisms that have nothing to do with the reality that there were people living on that land, and Israel bullied them (and continues to bully them) off of it. Why do you continue to lie so blatantly, War Angel?


Does a person become a liar when you call him one? You clearly miss the idea of what is "war" and how shit doesn't go your way. But whatever, "Jews are thieves". Let's just forget history, dumb it down to "good guys and bad guys" and go have a picnic. Then we can "chat" about those evil Jews.

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org ... stine.html

For being bullied, the Palestinians population has grown an awful lot since Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza. The Israeli Arab population has remained at about 20% since its inception. I really don't understand your tripe because, frankly, the only people being bullied out of their homes are Jews. These people are not allowed to settle previously unsettled land as if it were "Palestinian" by your own words.

The Romans wons. Thanks, guys, for sticking it up for the big guy. :eek:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 8

No reparations. One note though. We are not ta[…]

I think it should remain an independent nation. I[…]

I think this is one of the best examples yet of ho[…]

But why would a capitalist society value gold ove[…]