DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Richpo64 on November 27, 2007, 11:49:04 AM
-
Palestinians: Aggressors, Not Victims
By David Meir-Levi
FrontPageMagazine.com | 11/27/2007
Arab propaganda has been successful in presenting a picture of the Palestinian people as the helpless and innocent victims of Israeli aggression -- potential friends of America who have been alienated by America?s support for Israel and its failure to support a Palestinian national state. This decision is itself the result of a ?Jewish Lobby? run by ?neocons? and ?receiving its orders? from Israel. The fact that Palestinians are now led by two terrorist organizations, Fatah and Hamas, is also blamed on Israel and the United States rather than on the Palestinians who elected terrorists as leaders.
According to Palestinian revisionism, the Palestinians lived from time immemorial in historic Palestine, a veritable paradise of flourishing orchards and fertile vineyards, teeming with happy peasants. Then, the evil Zionists came and, with the support of the British, stole the Palestinians? land, exiled their people, and initiated a reign of terror and ethnic cleansing that has not abated until this very day.
Goebbels died 60 years ago, but his core propaganda strategy lives on in the Great Arab Lie that there exists a Palestinian people who have suffered great injustices at the hands of Israel, the UK, and the USA. Arab leaders know that if they just keep repeating the same lie often enough, eventually people will believe it -- and the greater the lie, the more readily will people believe it.
Since the Six-Day War, the Arab world?s most powerful leaders -- in Egypt, Libya, Arabia, Syria, and Iraq prior to Saddam?s demise -- have waged a war of words against Israel. Having failed to defeat Israel by means of naked military aggression, these leaders and their advisors decided, sometime between the end of the war and the Khartoum Conference of August-September 1967, to bring about the destruction of Israel by means of a relentless terror war.
To justify to the world their ruthless mass murder of Israeli civilians and their undying hatred of the West, these leaders needed to invent a bizarre and apposite reality. Slowly but surely, the reality of the ?little David? Israel assailed by the ?giant Goliath? of the entire Arab world has been reversed. Now the ?Goliath? Israel is depicted as the racist, apartheid, war-mongering, oppressive, illegal occupier Jewish State, regional superpower, hell-bent on the destruction, indeed, the genocide of the poor, defenseless Palestinian people -- the Middle East?s new ?David.? This grotesque fiction could be foisted upon the world only if there were indeed a ?little David? for Goliath Israel to oppress; only if Israel?s combatant in the conflict were not the entire Arab world, but rather some poor, enfeebled people who could mount no real defense against the Jewish superpower, but nonetheless had a stronger claim to the land of Israel than Israel itself.
Thus the PLO, under the tutelage of the KGB, invented ?The Palestinian People.?
This propaganda war has developed a mendacious narrative which works in two directions at once. On one hand, Arab propaganda sources claim the Canaanites were Palestinians; Abraham was a Palestinian; so were David, Solomon, and even Jesus. And the Jews were interlopers, invaders, and conquerors in the days of Joshua, just as they are now.
On the other hand, Israel is discredited and delegitimised in the present by the endless anti-Israel resolutions in the UN, orchestrated in large part by the Arab bloc and their Russian (formerly Soviet) mentors; and by the constant clamor of Arab states to the world at large, promoting the risible assertion that Israel is the aggressor. This occurs even though Israel has sued for peace after winning each war, Israel has agreed a dozen times over to the creation of a Palestinian state on part of its land, even as Hamas? qassam rockets fall daily upon innocent Israeli civilians, even as Hezbollah declares vociferously its goal of the annihilation of world Jewry, and Iran looks forward perpetrating a nuclear Armageddon in order to create a world without Israel. If only Israel were destroyed, they assert, then the entire Middle East would know peace.
This mendacious narrative is stalwartly bolstered by a growing host of pseudo-academics in Western universities, and by a cadre of Western journalists, who churn out books and articles that effectively rewrite history and archaeology in order to erase Israel?s connection to the Holy Land and thus deny both the Christian and Jewish historic and religious roots in the Land of Israel.
This propaganda campaign to legitimize the 60-year-old Arab war against Israel and to create the fiction of the ?Palestinian people? as the poor oppressed victims of imperialist colonialist Israel, illegally occupying ?Historic Palestine,? is a veritable war against History. It deals in lies, just the kind of lies Goebbels had in mind. And the biggest lie of all is the existence of a ?Palestinian People.?
How the Lie Began
After he took over as leader of the PLO, [1] Arafat sent his adjutant, Abu Jihad (later the leader of the PLO?s military operations), to North Vietnam to study the strategy and tactics of guerilla warfare. Arafat was struck by Ho Chi Minh?s success with left-wing sympathizers in the United States and Europe. ?Progressive? activists on American campuses, enthusiastically following the line of North Vietnamese operatives, had succeeded in reframing the Vietnam War from a Communist conquest of the South into a struggle for national liberation. An insight into this North Vietnamese PR campaign, which provided the key to the Communist victory and a lesson for PLO operatives, was offered by Ho?s chief strategist, General Giap: ?Stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand.?
Giap?s counsel was simple but profound: the PLO needed to work in a way that concealed its real goals, permitted strategic deception, and gave the appearance of moderation. And the key to all this was creating an image that would help Arafat manipulate the American and Western news media.
The PLO also looked to other examples of a ?people?s war? to find both military allies and ideological paradigms. Thanks to input from the late Romanian President-for-Life Ceausescu, General Giap, and the Algerians, Arafat developed the images of the ?illegal occupation? and ?Palestinian national self-determination,? both of which lent his terrorism the mantle of a legitimate peoples? resistance. After the Six-Day War, Muhammad Yazid, who had been minister of information in two Algerian wartime governments (1958-1962), imparted to Arafat some wisdom that echoed the lessons he had learned in North Vietnam:
Wipe out the argument that Israel is a small state whose existence is threatened by the Arab states, or the reduction of the Palestinian problem to a question of refugees; instead, present the Palestinian struggle as a struggle for liberation like the others. Wipe out the impression...that in the struggle between the Palestinians and the Zionists, the Zionist is the underdog. Now it is the Arab who is oppressed and victimized in his existence because he is not only facing the Zionists but also world imperialism. [2]
Of course, there was one ingredient missing in this imaginative reconfiguration of the struggle: There had never been a ?Palestinian People,? nor a ?Palestinian Nation,? nor a sovereign state known as ?Palestine,? nor even any specific territorial entity that could rightfully be called ?historic Palestine.?
Inventing ?Palestine?
The term Palestine (Falastin in Arabic) was an ancient name for the general geographic region that is more or less today?s Israel. The name derives from the Philistines, who originated from the eastern Mediterranean, and invaded the region in the 11th and 12th centuries B.C. The Philistines were apparently from Greece, or perhaps Crete, or the Aegean Islands, and/or Ionia. They seem to be related to the Bronze Age Greeks, and they spoke a language akin to Mycenaean Greek. Their descendents, still living on the shores of the Mediterranean, greeted Roman invaders a thousand years later. The Romans corrupted the name to ?Palestina,? and the area under the sovereignty of their littoral city-states became known as ?Philistia.? Six-hundred years later, the Arab invaders called the region ?Falastin.?
Throughout subsequent history, the name remained only a vague geographical entity. There was never a nation of ?Palestine,? never a people known as the ?Palestinians? nor any notion of ?historic Palestine.? The region never enjoyed any sovereign autonomy, remaining instead under successive foreign sovereign domains from the Umayyads and Abbasids to the Fatimids, Ottomans, and British.
During the centuries of Ottoman rule, when the ?dead hand of the Turk? (to quote Lord Byron, ?Childe Harold?s Pilgrimage?) brutally frustrated the attempts at national self-determination among the Turks? unhappy subjects in Greece, Armenia, Albania, and the Kurds, no Arabs under Turkish rule made any attempt to formulate an ideology of national identity, least of all the impoverished Arab peasantry in the region today known as Israel.
The emergence of Arab nationalism has been thoroughly documented, [3] and Arab sources are clear that even after the First World War, when the Ottoman Empire was carved up into various Middle Eastern nation-states, there was no concept of a separate state or people of ?Palestine.? On the eve of the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, the very first congress of the Muslim-Christian Association met to select representatives; and they took care to note that the entity now termed Palestine by the British was ?by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds? in inseparable part of Syria. [4] The same arguments were raised by Arab spokespersons in the UN on the eve of the 1947 partition plan.
The term Palestinian, ironically, was used during the British Mandate period (1922-1948) to identify the Jews of British Mandatory Palestine. The Arabs of the area were known as ?Arabs?; and their own designation of the region was balad esh-Sham (the province of Damascus). While some Arab nationalist writers, and coffee-shop intellectuals in Cairo or Beirut, developed the concept of Arab nationalism in large part as a response to Zionism, the terms ?Palestine? and ?Palestinian? were used in their traditional sense as geographic designations, not as national identities.
In early 1947, in fact, when the UN was exploring the possibility of the partition of British Mandatory Palestine into two states, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs, various Arab political and academic spokespersons spoke out vociferously against such a division because, they argued, the region was really a part of southern Syria, no such people or nation as ?Palestinians? had ever existed, and it would be an injustice to Syria to create a state ex nihilo at the expense of Syrian sovereign territory. [5]
An even greater irony is the fact that the Arab population of the region grew almost four-fold from the onset of the Zionist Endeavour (1855) to the beginning of Israel?s statehood (1948) in large part because of:
a) The efforts of the Zionist pioneers to reclaim waste land and turn it in to farmland, thus creating both farming and grazing land for Arabs; and
b) The substantial improvements in the economy of the region which were generated by both the British and the Zionists; and
c) The substantial improvements in the health services generated by the Zionists and the British.
From a mere 350,000 in 1855, the Arab population of the region increased to around 1.4 million by 1947. Part of this increase came from immigration in to the region from surrounding areas which lacked the burgeoning economy and health services offered by the British and the Zionists. Part came from the dramatic decrease in infant mortality and increase in longevity which the Arabs of the region enjoyed, thanks to the health and nutrition improvements generated by the Zionists and the British. [6]
Thus, it is quite likely that the majority of Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip today owe their very existence to Zionism and British Middle Eastern foreign policy.
During the 19 years from Israel?s victory in 1948 to Israel?s victory in the Six-Day War, all that remained of the UN?s partitioned territory to the ?Arabs? of British Mandatory Palestine were the West Bank, under illegal Jordanian sovereignty, and the Gaza Strip, under Egyptian rule. Never during these 19 years did any Arab leader anywhere in the world argue for the right of national self-determination for the Arabs of these territories. A ?Palestinian? nation and ?Palestinian? people had not yet been invented. Even Yasser Arafat, from the earliest of his terrorist days until 1967, used the term ??Palestinians?? to refer to the Arabs who lived under, or had fled from, Israeli sovereignty; and the term ?Palestine? to refer to Israel in its pre-1967 borders (the 1949 armistice line).
Article 24 of the PLO?s original founding document, the PLO Covenant, states: ?this Organization (the PLO) does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in the Gaza Strip or the Himmah area.? For Arafat before the Six-Day War, Palestine was Israel. It was not the West Bank or the Gaza Strip; because the West Bank and the Gaza Strip belonged to other Arab states, and the inhabitants of these areas were not numbered among the Palestinians whose ?homeland? Arafat sought to ?liberate.? The only "homeland" for the PLO in 1964 was the State of Israel. However, in response to the Six Day War, the PLO revised its Covenant on July 17, 1968, to remove the operative language of Article 24, thereby newly asserting a ?Palestinian? claim of sovereignty to the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
This ploy was, perhaps inadvertently, revealed to the West in a public interview with Zahir Muhse?in, a member of the PLO Executive Committee, in a March 31, 1977, interview with the Amsterdam-based newspaper Trouw.
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ?Palestinian people? to oppose Zionism. For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan. (Emphasis added.)
Arafat himself said the same thing, on many occasions, and asserts often in his authorized biography (Alan Hart, Arafat: Terrorist or Peace Maker): ?[T]he Palestinian people have no national identity. I, Yasser Arafat, man of destiny, will give them that identity through conflict with Israel.?
But such admissions could not stem the enthusiasm with which these fictions were greeted by Western leaders. Within a few years, the USSR's invention of the fictitious narrative of Palestinian national aspirations and rights of self-determination created the facade of morality and legitimacy that the terrorists needed to curry favor with the EU, the UK, and the U.S. This same facade facilitated the Soviet implementation of its takeover, with the Arab bloc, of the UN General Assembly, and UN committees and functions outside of the Security Council.
?Palestinian nationalism? today?
But what about today? After 60 years of unrelenting terror war against Israel, 60 years of hardship and privation incarcerated in refugee camps scattered throughout the Arab world -- an incarceration forced upon them by their host Arab countries, not by Israel -- after 40 years of the propagandistic pretense that the people today known the ?Palestinians? were and are a cohesive national group with historic roots in what they call ?Palestine,? and after 14 years of a ?Palestinian Authority? created by the Oslo Accords to offer the ?Palestinians? the framework and infrastructure of their own state?what is the condition of ?Palestinian Nationalism? today?
For the answer to that question, we must look to the current demographic distribution of ?Palestinians? both in Israel and in what they call the ?Palestinian Diaspora.?
Estimates vary, but most place the Palestinian population at about 9 million worldwide. Of these, more than 3 millionlive in the West Bank and Gaza Strip today, [7] more than 4 million live in Arab countries, and the remainder have migrated elsewhere, mostly to the West. [8] These figures do not include the approximately 1.3 million Arab Israeli citizens (who are sometimes incorrectly referred to as ?Palestinians? or ?Israeli Palestinians?) living within the borders of pre-1967 Israel.
Although the Arab narrative states the ?Palestinians? are Arabs who fled Israel in 1948, and fled the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967 and were forced in to refugee camps by their host Arab countries, less than one-third of all ?Palestinians? in the Arab world and Israel live in refugee camps. More than 67 percent of these Palestinians have left the camps over the decades since those wars, and have created homes, jobs, and families for themselves throughout the Arab countries and the world.
Moreover, even those who remained in the refugee camps harbor no great desire to return to what the propaganda narrative claims are their homes and farms in Israel. In a 2003 opinion poll taken by Khalil Shikaki?s Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (Ramallah, Palestinian Authority), only ten percent of respondents said they would agree to return to a Palestinian state. Only 10 percent of these respondents -- i.e., one percent of the entire survey -- would agree to return to their homes in Israel if it meant becoming citizens of Israel; they would return only if Israel no longer existed and had been replaced by a Palestinian state. [9]
Clearly the results of this poll presented a serious challenge to the concept of Palestinian nationalism and to the hype and hyperbole that the Arab narrative has given to the wholly fabricated concept of ?right of return.? So serious was this challenge, and so totally incapable were Arab leaders of mounting any rational argument against it, that they resorted to violence in order to silence Shikaki. Shortly after the poll was published, ?there were about a hundred people who basically stormed into the office. They wanted to attack me, attack the center, attack the staff. They believe that the right of return is being tampered with?What it indicated is that there is a great deal of softness, practicality, on the exercise of the right in terms of people electing or choosing their place of residence. That is the shocking, [sic.] in terms of for the first time, having these results being made public.? [10]
Shocking indeed. Other reports indicate that nearly 200 armed gunmen stormed Shikaki?s offices, destroyed computers and books and records, threatened and intimidated office workers, and threatened to kill Shikaki himself if he continued his work. Clearly such concrete evidence that the Palestinian?s putative love for his land and yearning for his ancestral home is long a thing of the past, if indeed it ever existed at all, is existentially threatening to the propagandists who demand a ?right of return? for all the millions of ?Palestinians? who now claim the status of refugees.
Shikaki?s poll is even more important when one considers the tragic plight of Palestinians, refugees or otherwise, in their Arab host countries. One might think, on the basis of the oft-ballyhooed commitment of Arab states to the ?Palestinian cause? that their Arab brethren would treat the Palestinian refugees well in their host countries. But one would be wrong.
The Palestinians have suffered grievously at the hands of their Arab hosts. Conditions vary from country to country, but Arab host governments and societies have maintained a level of hostility toward Palestinians that expresses itself in numerous legal limitations on their rights of movement, employment, land and home purchase, citizenship, discrimination and general antipathy on the part of the host society. Studies of attitudes in various host countries indicate a fear and suspicion of the Palestinians, and a hostility bordering on violence [11] -- this despite the almost universal agreement by Arab states to the Casablanca Protocol, in which is outlined the need for the proper care and rehabilitation of the refugees, but without compromising their status as refugees. [12]
This hostility has in some cases overflowed into lethal violence against the Palestinians by their host brethren. During the first Gulf War, Kuwait expelled 300,000 of its 440,000 Palestinian residents because they sided with Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait, despite the fact that most of them had been born in Kuwait and lived there all their lives. This extreme Arab-vs.-Arab ethnic cleansing merited almost no column-inches in Western news outlets. More than a decade later, Kuwait?s hostility toward Palestinians and the Palestinian Authority is still intense. [13]
Perhaps even more revealing is the fact that once the Palestinian Authority was established, as a product of the Oslo Accords (of September 1993), and Palestinians worldwide looked forward to the emergence of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, there was no perceptible influx of Diaspora Palestinians to their erstwhile homeland.
In light of the above, one may reasonably ask: Why do Arab leaders and their Amen Corner insist on the Arab ?right of return? and the fulfillment of the putative ?inalienable right of national self-determination? for the ?Palestinian people?? Half of the answer has already been given to us by Arafat himself and Zahir Muhse?in in the aforementioned interview. But, unfortunately, the other half is more heinous than the first. The fiction of an uprooted and oppressed ?Palestinian people? is really much more than a justification for endless terrorism and war against Israel: it is also the hoax whereby the Arab bloc in the UN can maintain, at levels of near hysteria, their justification for a propaganda war and a terror war against the United States.
Palestinians in the Jihad against ?global non-belief?
As described above, Palestinians and their leaders were allied with the Nazis before and during World War II. After the war, Arab states offered safe haven to Nazi criminals and incorporated Nazi Jew-hatred in to traditional Muslim anti-Jewish ideology. During the Cold War, Palestinians were in alliance against the U.S. with the USSR, serving as their proxy terrorists against Western targets; and during the first Gulf War they sided with Saddam Hussein. Palestinian leadership and some significant part of the rank-and-file have been the enemies of the USA and the West for the past 70 years. [14]
Today, Hezbollah and Hamas work with Iran and al-Qaeda to advance the cause of global jihad. Israel is the first target, but the USA is next. Hezbollah?s leader, Hassan Nasr?allah has said, ?'Death to America? is not a slogan. Death to America is a policy, a strategy, and a vision.?
Just as Arafat served his Soviet masters, so too now do Hamas and Hezbollah serve Iran. Pursuant to Iran?s goals and strategies, Hezbollah has attacked many USA targets over the past 25 years. Iran?s use of Hezbollah as its proxy gives Iran ?plausible deniability? in these actions. Of Hezbollah?s terror attacks against USA targets, the most deadly were the April 18 and October 23, 1983, suicide bombings against American targets in Beirut, killing 63 and 241 Americans respectively, wounding hundreds of others. [15]
The tragic and very perilous reality is that Palestinian Arabs, since before World War II, have in large numbers supported the very worst of America?s enemies, from the Nazis to the Soviets to Saddam Hussein; and now they support the Islamo-fascist terrorist jihad against the West. Today the majority party in the Palestinian Authority is Hamas, a self-defined terrorist organization which has joined forces with Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and Iran in their terror war against the West. On September 13, 2001, a high-ranking Hamas official told the world just how deeply Hamas hates the U.S. In response to the attack of 9/11, Dr. Atallah Abd as-Subh published an open letter to America, in which he said: ?Allah has answered our prayers; the sword of vengeance has reached America and will strike again and again.? [16]
Hamas cooperates closely with al-Qaeda. Since the Israeli unilateral and unconditional retreat from the Gaza Strip in August, 2005, al-Qaeda cells under the leadership of Abu Mus?ab al-Zarqawi, have entered the Strip and work alongside of Hamas and the dozen other terror groups at large there. Al-Zarqawi recruits Gaza Strip Palestinians with family members in the West Bank for his terrorist efforts because they can more easily cross the Israeli check points under the guise of ?family reunions.?
Al-Qaeda and Hamas and Hezbollah deployed for terror in the USA
Operatives from the major Arab and Iranian terror groups have infiltrated our own homeland with the intent to attack us from within. Palestinian terror groups and individuals are a key part of this operation. [17]
Very little of this information has ever appeared in our mainstream media. Rather, the task of informing the American public of the dangers posed to us by Iranian and Palestinian terrorist jihad falls, with very few exceptions, to more highly specialized (and apparently more honest and courageous) media outlets.
A survey of these non-mainstream media discloses the most discomforting evidence that Palestinian and other terrorists are:
Thoroughly and comfortably ensconced in downtown America, under the noses of law-enforcement and Homeland Security officials, and they number in the thousands; [18]
Training for war in secret camps in the USA; [19]
Infiltrating the USA?s own military; [20]
Penetrating Washington, D.C., with political influence, staffers, and spies; [21]
Exploiting our legal system to advance their propaganda and stifle criticism or analysis of their jihadist goals; [22]
Copying American Indian legal precedents in order to establish enclaves of Muslim legal independence in which Shari?a law trumps the Constitution inside the USA; [23] and
Working to prevent us from understanding the jihadist goals of these actions by dissimulating, covering up and whitewashing the terrorists and their apologists. [24]
And our mainstream media seem ignorant of, or inclined to ignore, the accumulating evidence that jihadist sleeper cells abound with Hezbollah and Hamas and al-Qaeda terrorists hidden within the Islamic American community, waiting for the call to action from Teheran or Damascus. [25]
Palestinian attempted attacks on American Soil
Recently declassified CIA documents reveal that as early as March 1973, the Palestinian terrorist group Black September, a PLO sub-group created by Arafat, tried to detonate three car bombs in New York City, timed to coincide with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir's visit. The powerful bombs, which might have killed or wounded hundreds, failed to explode due to improper wiring of the timing mechanisms. It is now well known that Arafat ordered the murders of American and Belgian diplomats in Sudan. And since then the PLO and Fatah and other Palestinian terrorists groups have claimed dozens of Americans as their victims. Later, individual Palestinians carried out their own personal version of jihad with attacks or attempted attacks on American soil. Palestinian Arabs in Brooklyn prepared a biological terror attack on a Brooklyn bus and a subway station, which was thwarted by an almost unbelievable stroke of good luck. (A neighbor in their Brooklyn apartment complex noticed the multiple UPS deliveries of glass laboratory equipment to their apartment. She alerted the police, thinking that they were running a ?meth-lab? in their kitchen). Palestinians were involved in the attack on the World Trade Center in February 1993. They had also planned to blow up the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, and the United Nations building.
And many more attacks have been planned. Especially after 9/11, al-Qaeda commanders and officials stationed in Western countries, including the United States, have recruited Hamas operatives and volunteers to carry out reconnaissance or to serve as couriers. In August 2004, two suspected high-level Hamas operatives, Mohammed Salah and Abdelhaleem Ashqar, were detained in the U.S. and charged with providing material support to Hamas, racketeering and money laundering. In November 2003, Jamal Aqal, a Gazan who emigrated to Canada, was arrested in Israel under suspicion of receiving weapons and explosives training from Hamas for use in future terror attacks in Canada and New York City. Aqal pleaded guilty in 2004 to planning to kill American and Canadian Jewish leaders and Israeli officials traveling in the U.S.
Also in 2004, Ismail Selim Elbarasse, a long-time Hamas money man, was arrested in Maryland, reportedly after authorities witnessed his wife videotaping Maryland's Chesapeake Bay Bridge from their SUV as Elbarasse drove. The images captured by Elbarasse's wife included close-ups of cables and other features "integral to the structural integrity of the bridge," according to court papers. Hamas leaders discussed openly their plans, and threats, to carry out terror operations against American targets in the Middle East and in the USA because of America?s support for President Abbas and the PLO after Hamas? election victory.
Conclusion
During the week of June 13, 2007, Hamas forces soundly defeated the much larger and better armed Fatah forces in Gaza, killing at least 160 Arab Palestinian Fatah loyalists, effectively destroying the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip and establishing complete control over the Gaza Strip.
This new development affords Hamas a prime strategic asset for escalating its violent campaign against Israel. This sudden and unexpected shift, this rebellion against Abbas, is also a rebellion against moderation; and it is a direct attack against U.S. goals in the Middle East. Hamas? actions, and the widespread support for these actions among the Palestinian people, also reveal something else: that the Palestinian people are at war with America.
The history outlined above demonstrates that this war has been going on for three-quarters of a century, beginning in the 1930s with the alliance between the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Hitler, developing from the 1960s to the present with Arafat?s actions as an agent for Soviet policy and a supporter of Sadam Hussein in the first Gulf War, and Hamas? overtly anti-American threats and attacks and its backing of Hezbollah?s attacks against Americans today.
It cannot be argued that hatred of America is restricted to only a small minority of Palestinians, the leaders, the fanatics, the extremists. Hundreds of thousands adored the Mufti and yearned for his Final Solution. Millions followed Arafat, cheering and celebrating when he hit both Israelis and Americans. Tens of thousands flocked to his banner to join his forces (Fatah, PLO, PFLP, PFLP-GC, DFLP, the abu-Nidal group, Tanzim, Force 17, el-Aqsa Martyrs? Brigade, the Black September Group, among others) and created a full-fledged terrorist army.
Moreover, in 1996 the Palestinian people voted him in to office with a landslide victory. When his mandate expired in January of 2000, there was no opposition to his continued illegal control of the Palestinian Authority until his death in November 2004. After Arafat?s death, the voters? loyalties shifted not to his supposedly more moderate successor, Mahmoud Abbas (nor to any of the other moderate parties on the 2006 PA ballot: Hanan Ashrawi?s ?Third Way? party garnered only 3 percent of the votes on a platform of ending the Intifada), but to the terrorist army offering the most extreme agenda of terrorism and mass murder and endless war against Israel and against the USA: Hamas.
But why this animosity toward America? One reason commonly offered is that Palestinian hatred comes from U.S. support for Israel. The fictions of the ?Palestinian people? who have been exiled and oppressed by Israel, and of the ?Palestinian homeland? which has been stolen from its rightful owners by the evil Zionists, provide justification to Arab hatred against the USA for supporting Israel, the cause of all the Palestinian suffering.
But while the U.S. does support Israel, it has also done much to support the Arab world, the Palestinians, Yasser Arafat, and the PLO in particular. And the USA has been a prime mover in the efforts since World War II to create a Palestinian state alongside of Israel. After World War II, President Roosevelt took the uncompromisingly anti-imperialist position that Third World countries should be given the opportunity for self-determination; and the Muslim Third World was very much a part of his vision. On a regular basis from Roosevelt to Clinton, the U.S. has given almost as much money to Egypt as to Israel, has given billions more over the years to many other Arab states, and has given billions more to UNRWA for support of Palestinian refugees, and this despite the fact that UN representatives acknowledge that UNRWA refugee camps have become havens for terrorists whose targets include Americans and who have been complicit in the development of worldwide terrorism.
In addition to being a consistent source of financial largesse to the Palestinians, America has for almost 60 years has consistently and intentionally turned a blind eye to the fact that at least some of that money is used to recruit, train, equip, arm, and deploy terrorists against Israel, and at times against American targets.
As president, Jimmy Carter played a crucial role in Arafat?s makeover from terrorist to statesman, and as ex-president he has slavishly supported the Palestinians. Arafat was an honored guest at the White House more than any other head of state during Bill Clinton?s presidency. President Clinton hosted the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, which brought Arafat out of exile and set in to motion what should have been the creation of a Palestinian state. He presided, as well, over the Camp David II talks, in which Arafat was offered the state of Palestine on a silver platter. Presidents Clinton and Bush have authorized hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to the PA since the Oslo Accords (1993).
President Bush was the first American president to make a public commitment to the creation of a Palestinian state; and he led the ?Quartet? in initiating the Road Map whose main goal was getting peace negotiations back on track so that a Palestinian state could emerge with the resolution of the conflict.
If their right to national self-determination and getting their own state were indeed what the Palestinians' leadership wanted, that leadership would see the U.S. as an ally. But they see the U.S. as an enemy. Why? Because their most profound dreams do not involve national self-determination or a state of their own.
The Palestinians are instead motivated by the dream of what the most extreme of the world?s Muslim terror armies say they can deliver: the destruction of Israel, ?Death to America,? and ?Islam uber Alles.?
ENDNOTES:
[1] Much of the following is based upon research published in Meir-Levi, David, History Upside Down: The Origins of Palestinian Fascism and the Myth of Israeli Aggression (Encounter Books, 2007).
The PLO was actually the brain-child of the KGB, which was creating a number of front ?liberation? organizations throughout the Third World, which would serve as proxies for Soviet aggression against the West.
In 1964 the first PLO Council, consisting of 422 Palestinian representatives handpicked by the KGB, approved Moscow?s blueprint for a Palestinian National Charter?a document that had been drafted in Moscow?and made the KGB agent of influence, Ahmed Shuqairy, the first PLO chairman. The Romanian espionage service (DIE) was given responsibility for providing the PLO with logistical support. Except for the arms, which were supplied by the KGB and the East German Stasi, everything (as Pacepa wrote) ??came from Bucharest. Even the PLO uniforms and the PLO stationery were manufactured in Romania free of charge, as a ?comradely help.?
The Soviets not only armed and trained Palestinian terrorists but also used them to arm and train other professional terrorists by the thousands. The International Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), the Soviet Security Police (KGB) and Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) all played major roles in this effort. The International Department of the CPSU, working out of the Lenin Institute in Moscow, had the main responsibility for supervising the curriculum of revolutionary thought and practice in these groups as well as liaison with the Central Committee of the CPSU. Selected members of Western and Third World Communist Parties following the Soviet line were trained there in psychological warfare and propaganda, as well as in military techniques and guerrilla warfare.
The CPSU also built Moscow's Patrice Lumumba Friendship University to serve as a base of indoctrination and training of potential "freedom fighters" from the Third World. More specialized training in terrorism was provided at locations in Baku, Odessa, Simferopol, and Tashkent. Mahmoud Abbas, later to succeed Yasir Arafat as head of the PLO, was a graduate of Patrice Lumumba U, where he received his Ph.D. in 1982 after completing a thesis involving Holocaust denial.
[2] As quoted in Pacepa, Ion Michai, Red Horizons.
[3] See George Antonius, The Arab Awakening: The Story of the Arab National Movement; Baruch Kimmerling and Joel S. Migdal, The Palestinian People: A History; and Rashid Khalidi, Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness, for very comprehensive and in-depth surveys of this topic, with ample bibliography.
[4] Hertz, Eli E., Myths and Facts, 2005, and cf. also Porath, Yehoshua, The Palestinian Arab National movement: From Riots to Rebellion, 1977. It is instructive in this context to note that Khalidi (supra note #3) attempts to make a case for a nascent national identity among the Arab Muslims of the Holy land, constructed over a long period of time, as early as the late 18th century. This assertion has found support in some of his reviewers (and cf. inter alia, Geoffrey Schad?s review of Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness, in the Middle East Policy Council Journal, Volume VI, February 1999, Number 3); but even a cursory reading of Khalidi?s treatment of this subject reveals that the only early example of what he calls ?Palestinian National sentiment? is actually an example of Muslim religious apartheid. The Muslim religious leaders of Jerusalem protested the Sultan?s permitting French representatives to establish an office in Jerusalem in the late 18th century. The Jerusalem Muslim religious elite were affronted that an infidel ?Ifrangi? (Frenchman) not under a dhimmi treaty should be allowed to pollute the sacred precinct with his presence. Disdain and disgust for someone of another religion is hardly an example of nationalist sentiment.
[5] As correctly noted by Kimmerling and Khalidi (supra note #4) and Conan Cruise O?Brien in The Siege.
[6] For details regarding the population growth of the Arabs in the region in the century before the creation of the State of Israel, cf. Justin McCarthy, Population of Palestine (1990); and more generalized treatment of the issue by Joan Peters, From Time Immemorial, and Conan Cruise O?Brien, The Siege. See also http://www.cjpme.ca/documents/En%20Demographics%20Factsheet%20v.1.pdf and https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/arabs/paldem1.html.
[7] For a detailed discussion of the origins of the Arab Refugee Problem, the proof that the total onus of culpability for the creation of the Arab refugee population rests not upon Israel but upon the Arab states who invaded Israel in 1948, and the documented evidence for an original refugee population of around 725,000 (which magically burgeoned in to many millions over the past si decades), see David Meir-Levi, Big Lies (David Horowitz Freedom Center, 2005).
It is important to note that the Arab population of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1965 was about 1,000,000. After the Six-Day War the population at first declined due to Arab refugees fleeing the Israeli army; but very shortly thereafter it began a rapid increase as refugees returned and the economy of the West Bank and Gaza Strip flourished under Israeli sovereignty. Since 1967 the Arab population there has almost quadrupled. Yet the spin-meisters and propagandists routinely accuse Israel of perpetrating a genocide on the Palestinians (some hedge their accusations with the bizarre assertion that it is a ?slow motion genocide?).
The salutary nature of Israel?s sovereignty over the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza Strip from 1967 to 1994 is confirmed by the UN. The UN provides a separate estimate of the total Palestinian population of the Gaza, East Jerusalem, and West Bank. It indicates that this population was 1,006,000 million in 1950, and rose to 1,100,000 in 1960, 1,094,000 in 1970, and then leapt to 1,477,000 in 1980 and 2,152,000 in 1990. This increase was the result of improvements in income and health services during the initial period of Israeli occupation before the Intifada. The Palestinian population rose to 2,629,000 in 1995 and 3,183,000 in 2000 ? a more than 20% increase during the five years before the Israeli-Palestinian War [the second uprising] began [Source: Anthony Cordesman, "From Peace to War: Land for Peace or Settlements for War," (DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies, August 15, 2003), pp. 12-13.]
[8] Below are samples of Palestinian population estimates from various sources including the UN and PASSIA (the Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs, Ramalla, Palestinian Authority). [For maps of dispersion, and statistics showing where the bulk of the refugees live, go to
http://mondediplo.com/maps/refugeesdiasporapaldpl2000 and
http://mondediplo.com/focus/mideast/a2335].
http://israelipalestinianprocon.org/?gclid=CKj3-4C74I8CFQpHhgodkWE2-Q
West bank Arab Gaza strip Arab
1960
799,000
302,000
1970**
677,000
368,000
1980
964,000
497,000
1985
1,044,000
532,288
1990
1,254,506
642,814
1995
1,626,689
875,231
2000
2,020,298
1,132,063
2005
2,385,615
1,376,289
Sources & Notes:
Sources by Year:
1948
Wael R. Ennab "Population and Demographic Developments in the West Bank and Gaza Strip until 1990," Study prepared for the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), 28 June 1994
1950 - 1980
Justin McCarthy "Palestine's Population During the Ottoman and the British Mandate Periods," 2001
1985 - 2005
U.S. Census Bureau "International Data Base (IDB), Country Summary: West Bank and Gaza Strip," accessed online Sep. 19, 2007
Notes:
*
Increase in the Arab population due to Palestinian Refugees from the territory of the new state of Israel to the West Bank and Gaza Strip during the first Arab-Israeli War (1948-1949)
**
Decrease in the Arab population between 1960 and 1970 due to Arab refugees from the 1967 War.
x=========================================x
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/refugee_table.html
Distribution of Palestinian Refugees
(As of June 2000)
Registered Population
Number of Camps
Total Camp Population
Registered Persons not in Camps
Percentage of population not in camps
Lebanon
376,472
12
210,715
165,757
44.02
Syria
383,199
10
111,712
271,487
70.84
Jordan
1,570, 192
10
280,191
1, 290,001
82.15
West Bank
583, 009
19
157,676
425,333
72.95
Gaza Strip
842,622
8
451,186
391,436
46.45
Total
3,737,494
59
1,211,480
2,526,014
67.58
Source: UNRWA Liaison Office, DC2?1755
United Nations
New York, NY 10017
Tel. 212?963?2255
Fax. 212?935?7899
=======================================================x
Palestinian Population Worldwide
(mid-2001)
http://www.passia.org/
West Bank & Gaza Strip
3,298,951
Israel
1,012,741
Jordan
2,472,501
Lebanon
456,824
Syria
494,501
Egypt
51,805
Saudi Arabia
291,778
Kuwait & other Gulf
149,786
Libya and Iraq
78,884
Other Arab countries
5,887
The Americas
216,196
Other Countries
275,303
Total
8,807,518
Source: PASSIA (Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs)
[9] Shikaki, Khalil, Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, at
http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2003/refugeesjune03.html. Shikaki?s poll was conducted between January and June of 2003, and published on his website in July of 2003, http://www.pcpsr.org/index.html
Mr. Shikaki took quite a bit of flack for this poll. Note Issam Mufid Nashashibi?s ?Palestinians and the Right of Return,? in Counterpunch, August 21, 2003. Nashashibi condemned the poll as being rigged in order to undermine the rights of the Palestinians. The essence of Nashashibi?s criticism is that Shikaki did not include in his survey any Palestinians living outside of the refugee camps (Shikaki explains that he did this because they were no longer refugees, having integrated in to their host countries). It never seems to have occurred to Mr. Nashashibi that indeed, Palestinians born to 2nd and 3rd generation residents of various Arab countries who have jobs and homes and families in those countries might indeed be integrated in to those countries and would not want to return to his mythic ?Palestine.?
The National Review also had some harsh words for Shikaki in Max Abrahms? ?Right of Return Revisited,? August 13, 2003. Abrahms pointed out that the problem was the nature of the questions posed. It seemed obvious to Abrahms that Palestinians would not want to go to a Jewish State, so, of course, 99% said no. But, opines Abrahms, they would want to return if the state were Palestine, and not Israel. It does not seem to have occurred to Mr. Abrahms that any such return would involve the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state?hardly a sound option if one is seeking peace in the Middle East.
Mr. Shikaki found a more friendly reception on NPR, where he was interviewed by Robert Siegel on ?All Things Considered,? July 14, 2003 (http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/transcripts/2003/jul/030714.shikaki.html). Siegel agreed with Shikaki that this poll indicates that the ?right of return? as demanded by Palestinian and other Arab leaders is, in reality, a dead issue. There is simply almost no one (maybe 1%) in the ?Palestinian Diaspora,? whether in refugee camps or in other parts of the world, who is possessed of a yearning for a return to ?historic Palestine.?
[10] Dr. Shikaki to Robert Siegel on NPR, supra note #9.
[11] See http://mondediplo.com/maps/refugeesdiasporapaldpl2000 and http://mondediplo.com/focus/mideast/a2335 for statistics and summary. For more detailed information, note Simon Haddad?s ?Palestinians in Lebanon: Towards Integration or Conflict?? in http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/PRRN/papers/haddad.html; and http://www.forcedmigration.org/guides/fmo025/fmo025.pdf for an extensive and fully footnoted discussion of Palestinians in Jordan, where in general they have been treated much better than in other host countries: with citizenship and rights to work and ability to integrate in to the country, get passports, travel abroad. For Syria, see ?Palestinian refugees in Syria? in http://www.forcedmigration.org/guides/fmo017/fmo017-3.htm; And also http://www.un.org/unrwa/refugees/syria.html (Reprinted from UNRWA, http://www.unrwa.org). For the most comprehensive and critical treatment of the plight of the Palestinians in Arab host countries, see http://www.islamonline.net/english/In_Depth/PalestineInFocus/Thepeople/articles/01.shtml
[12] For a detailed discussion of the Casablanca Protocol, see ?Protocol for the treatment of Palestinians in Arab States?, Sept. 11, 1965, in http://www.badil.org/Documents/Protection/LAS/Casablanca-Protocol.htm
[13] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1361060.stm.
[14] For a more detailed treatment of this subject, see Meir-Levi, David, History Upside Down (supra note #1). For detailed examination of Arafat?s allegiance to Saddam Hussein, cf: Glick, Carolyn, "The Baghdad-Ramallah Axis," Jerusalem Post, Oct. 7, 2002; Karsh, E., Arafat?s War (2003); Idem, ?Arafat's Grand Strategy?, Middle East Quarterly, 8.3.04; Meir-Levi, David, ?Left-wing Monsters: Arafat,? FrontPageMagazine.com, Sept. 23, 2005; Rubin, B. & Rubin, J. C., Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography.
And for Arafat?s alliance with Iraq during Gulf War 1, cf. also:
The PLO's Palestinian Legislative Council denounced the U.S. missile strike in western Iraq (in response to Iraqi attacks on Kurds there last year), as "American aggression against the sister state, Iraq." The PA also urged Arab states to provide Iraq "any form of financial aid and moral support...so that sister Iraq can recapture her natural place in the taking of the national and pan-Arab responsibility." (An Nahar, Sept. 5, 1996)
In 1991, the PLO representative in Washington, Hassan Abu Rahman, circulated a fabricated transcript of a radio interview in which U.S. General Norman Schwarzkopf supposedly "admitted" that "the war that our men fought against Saddam Hussein was for Israel, our men fought to destroy Israel's main enemy in the region." (Jerusalem Post, June 5, 1991)
During the 1990-1991 Persian Gulf crisis, PLO chairman Yasir Arafat was Saddam Hussein's closest Arab ally. After the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait, the PLO denounced America's opposition to the occupation, accusing Washington of "beating the drums of a destructive war and raising tension toward a complete explosion." (Jerusalem Post, Aug. 14, 1990).
According to the London Independent, "much of the logistical planning for the Iraqi invasion was based on intelligence supplied by PLO officials and supporters based in Kuwait." (Jerusalem Post, Aug. 8, 1990)
According to Yossef Bodansky, The Secret History of the Iraq War, Arafat was closely involved with Saddam in training special Iraqi terrorist forces for attacks against Israel and the USA using chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. Arafat?s PLO trainers worked in Syria and in Iraq in partnership with both Saddam and el-Qaeda to train and deploy Iraqi and Palestinian terrorist cells to infiltrate Israel, Europe and the USA for such attacks.
[15] The following list of Hezbollah attacks against the USA, since the organization was created by Iran in 1982, is from Jewish Virtual Library, per supra (note # 8).
July 19, 1982, Beirut, Lebanon. Hezbollah members kidnapped David Dodge, acting president of the American University in Beirut. After a year in captivity, Dodge was released. Rifat Assad, head of Syrian Intelligence, helped in the negotiation with the terrorists.
March 16, 1983, Beirut, Lebanon. Five American Marines were wounded in a hand grenade attack while on patrol north of Beirut International Airport. The Islamic Jihad and Al-Amal, a Shi'ite militia, claimed responsibility for the attack.
April 18, 1983, Beirut, Lebanon. A truck-bomb detonated by a remote control exploded in front of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 63 employees, including the CIA's Middle East director, and wounding 120. Hezbollah, with financial backing from Iran, was responsible for the attack.
October 23, 1983, Beirut, Lebanon. A truck loaded with a bomb crashed into the lobby of the U.S. Marines headquarters in Beirut, killing 241 soldiers and wounding 81. The attack was carried out by Hezbollah with the help of Syrian intelligence and financed by Iran.
January 18, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. Malcolm Kerr, a Lebanese born American who was president of the American University of Beirut, was killed by two gunmen outside his office. Hezbollah said the assassination was part of the organization's plan to "drive all Americans out from Lebanon."
March 7, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. Hezbollah members kidnapped Jeremy Levin, Beirut bureau chief of Cable News Network (CNN). Levin managed to escape and reach Syrian army barracks. He was later transferred to American hands.
March 8, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. Three Hezbollah members kidnapped Reverend Benjamin T. Weir, while he was walking with his wife in Beirut's Manara neighborhood. Weir was released after 16 months of captivity with Syrian and Iranian assistance.
March 16, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. Hezbollah kidnapped William Buckley, a political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut. Buckley was supposed to be exchanged for prisoners. However when the transaction failed to take place, he was reportedly transported to Iran. Although his body was never found, the U.S. administration declared the American diplomat dead.
April 12, 1984, Torrejon, Spain. Hezbollah bombed a restaurant near an U.S. Air Force base in Torrejon, Spain, wounding 83 people.
September 20, 1984, Beirut, Lebanon. A suicide bomb attack on the U.S. Embassy in East Beirut killed 23 people and injured 21. The American and British ambassadors were slightly injured in the attack, attributed to the Iranian backed Hezbollah group.
September 20, 1984, Aukar, Lebanon. Islamic Jihad detonate a van full of explosives 30 feet in front of the U.S. Embassy annex severely damaging the building, killing two U.S. servicemen and seven Lebanese employees, as well as 5 to 15 non-employees. Twenty Americans were injured, including U.S. Ambassador Reginald Bartholomew and visiting British Ambassador David Miers. An estimated 40 to 50 Lebanese were hurt. The attack came in response to the U.S. veto September 6 of a U.N. Security Council resolution.
December 4, 1984, Tehran, Iran. Hezbollah terrorists hijacked a Kuwait Airlines plane en route from Dubai, United Emirates, to Karachi, Pakistan. They demanded the release from Kuwaiti jails of members of Da'Wa, a group of Shiite extremists serving sentences for attacks on French and American targets on Kuwaiti territory. The terrorists forced the pilot to fly to Tehran where the terrorists murdered two passengers--American Agency for International Development employees, Charles Hegna and William Stanford. Although an Iranian special unit ended the incident by storming the plane and arresting the terrorists, the Iranian government might also have been involved in the hijacking.
June 14, 1985, Between Athens and Rome. Two Hezbollah members hijacked a TWA flight en route to Rome from Athens and forced the pilot to fly to Beirut. The terrorists, believed to belong to Hezbollah, asked for the release of members of the group Kuwait 17 and 700 Shi'ite prisoners held in Israeli and South Lebanese prisons. The eight crewmembers and 145 passengers were held for 17 days during which one of the hostages, Robert Stethem, a U.S. Navy diver, was murdered. After being flown twice to Algiers, the aircraft returned to Beirut and the hostages were released. Later on, four Hezbollah members were secretly indicted. One of them, the Hezbollah senior officer Imad Mughniyah, was indicted in absentia.
September 9, 1986, Beirut, Lebanon. Continuing its anti-American attacks, Hezbollah kidnapped Frank Reed, director of the American University in Beirut, whom they accused of being "a CIA agent." He was released 44 months later. September 12, 1986, Beirut, Lebanon. Hezbollah kidnapped Joseph Cicippio, the acting comptroller at the American University in Beirut. Cicippio was released five years later on December 1991.
October 21, 1986, Beirut, Lebanon. Hezbollah kidnapped Edward A. Tracy, an American citizen in Beirut. He was released five years later, on August 1991.
February 17, 1988, Ras-Al-Ein Tyre, Lebanon. Col. William Higgins, the American chief of the United Nations Truce Supervisory Organization, was abducted by Hezbollah while driving from Tyre to Nakura. The hostages demanded the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon and the release of all Palestinian and Lebanese held prisoners in Israel. The U.S. government refused to answer the request. Hezbollah later claimed they killed Higgins.
March 6, 1989, Cairo, Egypt. Two explosive devices were safely removed from the grounds of the American and British Cultural centers in Cairo. Three organizations were believed to be responsible for the attack: The January 15 organization, which had sent a letter bomb to the Israeli ambassador to London in January; the Egyptian Revolutionary Organization that from out 1984-1986 carried out attacks against U.S. and Israeli targets; and the Nasserite Organization, which had attacked British and American targets in 1988.
November 8, 1991, Beirut, Lebanon. A 100-kg car bomb destroyed the administration building of the American University in Beirut, killing one person and wounding at least a dozen.
June 25, 1996, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. A fuel truck carrying a bomb exploded outside the U.S. military's Khobar Towers housing facility in Dhahran, killing 19 U.S. military personnel and wounding 515 persons, including 240 U.S. personnel. Several groups claimed responsibility for the attack. In June 2001, a U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, identified Saudi Hezbollah as the party responsible for the attack. The court indicated that the members of the organization, banned from Saudi Arabia, "frequently met and were trained in Lebanon, Syria, or Iran" with Libyan help.
[16] Ar-Risala [the Hamas official newspaper], Sept. 13, 2001, quoted in MEMRI, Sept. 17, 2001, #268, http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Area=jihad&ID=SP26801
[17] In-depth exposure of this infiltration in to the USA by Palestinian and other Arab terrorist groups can be found in:
Bodansky, Yossef, Target The West: Terrorism in the World Today, 1993, and The Secret History of the Iraq War (2005)
Diaz, Tom, & Newman, Barbara, Lightning out of Lebanon (terrorists in USA);
Emerson, Steven, American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us;
Kushner, Harvey, Holy War on the Home Front: The Secret Islamic Terror Network in the United States;
Sperry, Paul, Infiltration: How Moslem Spies Penetrated Washington;
Murawiec, Laurent, Princes of Darkness: The Saudi Assault on the West;
Spencer, Robert Islam Unveiled and Onward Muslim Soldiers;
Trifkovic, Serge The Sword of the Prophet and Defeating Jihad
Infiltration in to Latin America has been on-going since the early 1980?s, and very successful in Argentina, Paraguay, Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela. For a brief summary of the situation see Meir-Levi, David, ?Connecting the South American Terror Dots,? (FrontPage Magazine, August 9, 2004) and Barlett, Donald and Steele, James, ?Who left the door open? American?s border: even after 9/11 it is outrageously easy to sneak in,? (Time Magazine, September 20, 2004). For further corroboration of the continued expansion of the Arab terror bases in South America, and the infiltration of these terrorists in to the USA via Mexico, cf.: BBC News, ?Arab smuggling network broken up,? April 28, 2006, http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/3710060.stm; Coman, Julian, ?Arab terrorists are getting into the US over Mexican border?, UK News Telegraph, May 15, 2004; Cucullu, Lt. Col. Gordon, ?Hamas moves into South America,? Front Page Magazine, Feburary 10, 2006; Gato, Pablo and Windrem, Robert, ?Hezbollah builds a Western base: From inside South America?s Tri-border area, Iran-linked militia targets U.S.,? NBC News, May 9, 2007; Jehl, Douglas, ?U.S. aides cite worry on Qaeda infiltration from Mexico,? New York Times, February 17, 2005; Myers, Joseph and Poole, Patrick, ?Hezbollah, Illegal Immigration, and the next 9/11,? FrontPage Magazine, April 28, 2006; North, Oliver, ?Back Door to Terror,? Human Events, October 20, 2004, and cf. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17639; and Sherman, Mark, ?FBI warns of ?special interest? aliens,? Associated Press, March 8, 2006)
[18] ?Northern Virginiastan,? editorial, Investors Business Daily, February 26, 2007, and cf. http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=257386735556435&view=1
[19] ?HOMELAND INSECURITY: Probe finds terrorists in U.S. 'training for war,' Neighbors of Muslim encampment fear retaliation if they report to police? World Net Daily, 2.19.06
[20] Pipes, Daniel ?Pentagon Jihadis,? New York Post, September 29, 2003, and cf. www.danielpipes.org | www.danielpipes.org/article/1259
[21] Glasov, Jamie interviews Paul Sperry in FrontPage Magazine, April 12, 2005
[22] Taylor, Randy, ?Islam: Setting the United States up for the fall,? March 19, 2007, Northeast Intelligence Network, http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/Taylor031907
[23] Smith, Issa, ?Native American Courts: Precedent for an Islamic arbitral system,? The American Muslim, February 14, 2007, originally published April-June, Spring 1993, and cf. http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/native_american_courts_precedent_for_an_islamic_arbitral_system/0013143)
[24]. Poole, Patrick, ?Cover Up and Deny,? FrontPage Magazine, Part I, May 16, 2007, Part II, May 31, 2007
.
[25] Asman, David, ?Does any terrorist organization pose a greater threat to Americans than al-Qaeda?? aired on Fox News, January 20, 2007, as ?Smokescreen: Hezbollah Inside America?; Gaubatz, Dave, ?Sleeper Cells in the United States and Canada, American Thinker, February 5, 2007, and cf. http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/sleeper_cells_in_the_united_st.html; and Lathem, Niles, ?N.Y. Hezbollah Hunt,? New York Post, May 22, 2006; and
-
FrontPage magazine sounds like an old Black Flag commercial.
Palestinians are like roaches.
They DESERVE to die.
I am sure that your totally unbiased article by celebrated Irishman David Mier-Levi has convinced the multitudes with its amazing theory that (a) there is no such thing as a Palestinian, and (b) they are unworthy of existence.
-
Strange.
I haven't seen Palestinians taking Israeli land and property, or putting up illegal settlements on it, or putting up barricades to keep Israelis from going to and from their jobs.
-
Sifting thru all the hyperbole from both sides, what can be said, is that the Palestinians are unfortunate pawns being used by both Arab & Israeli Governments. And worse, Palestinians keep getting forcefed, practically from birth, the propoganda of how evil Israel is supposed to be. Palestinians had no "lands" prior to the UN's decision to return Isreal to it's original location back in the late 40's. And the surrounding Arab countries could have easily taken in its "Palestinian brethren" at any time before or after Israel re-settled where it is now. But in fact, some Arab countries, IRC, actually now have laws preventing such, and now the "lands" Palestinians are supposed to have somehow happen to be specifically where Isreal currently is. Go figure
-
At this point, let's just give them their own State, provide them with some cash and then nuke either side if they trouble the other. Sounds fair to me. I'm sick of it all....
Or, move the Isrealis to the most inhospitable place on the face of the Earth and have them legitimately purchase it from the owner (say, middle of the Sahara Desert, or top of the Andes or wherever). In a few years, they will be prosperous again, if history is any judge at all.
So, they purchase, for billions obviously,,,hey, it's only money!... an island or series of islands from someone and build there, perhaps.
Whatever. Let's move on...
It's real simple, folks.
-
Omigosh, reading that article was like watching somebody produce four or five times his own body weight in diarrhoea. The revulsion one naturally feels in the presence of a half-ton of putrid crap is lost in the wonder of where did it all come from?
If anyone needs an example of how Zionism - - or the right wing in general - - constructs an alternate universe that is like no universe the rest of us have ever seen or experienced, this is it.
The reality is really pretty simple - - three million Arabs living hostages in a prison consisting of their own homes and lands, occupied for forty years by a Jewish army protecting what must now be 275,000 Jewish settlers, and walled in like cattle the better to protect those who swarm onto their land and bulldoze their homes, farms and businesses.
The alternate reality, though - - Goebbels, ruthless mass murder, undying hatred of the West, the KGB, the Canaananites, Ho Chi Minh, Abu Jihad, the U.S.S.R., Iran, Armageddon, Ceausecu, General Giap, the Algerians, the Philistines, Bronze Age Greeks, Lord Byron, and that's just reading the first few paragraphs. The guy was just getting warmed up.
It's been said that the Zionist propaganda machine operates on a few very simple theories, one being "Bullshit Baffles Brains," and I want to thank Rich for an almost textbook-perfect example of it. I'm floored.
-
LOL....speaking of hyperbole from the other side ::)
-
Palestinians keep getting forcefed, practically from birth, the propoganda of how evil Israel is supposed to be.
Sirs, that goes both ways.
And on that note, there are many groups trying to work through this problem, because truly, the children of the Palestinians and Israelis are the best hope for the future of the region.
-
>>Or, move the Isrealis to the most inhospitable place on the face of the Earth and have them legitimately purchase it from the owner.<<
They did that already, it's called Israel.
I'm always amazed at the ignorance that people show when it comes to Israel's history. I suggest you take some time and do some real research into the history of the the area. You'll find that there never was a country called Palestine, and that Israelis made that area what it is today. "Palestinians" don't exist today, nor did they exist 60 years ago. It's Arabs who create these refugees, and it's Arabs who keep them refugees for their own twisted political purposes.
The facts are the facts. Some people are easily taken in propaganda, some people can read.
-
Palestinians have been around for a long, long time once they called them Philistines. They are said to have arrived several centuries before Christ from Mycenean Greece, in boats, with pigs. The Philistines worshipped Baal and his wife, Astarte, and ate things that were most unkosher.
The Romans used the name Palestine. The people who lived in this country were Jews and Palestinians. The Romans threw most of the Jews out in 70 AD. The Muslims conquered the area in the 600's, due to the nature of Islam, they became Arabic speakers, but most of the people in Palestine were descendants of the people who lived there: the Philistines. the Canaanites, the Samaritans and all the rest of the Bad Guys mentioned in the Bible.
At least half of the Jews aren't Hebrews, either. They are the descendants of a Turkic tribe of people called the Kazars, who converted to Judaism because they did not want to be absorbed by the Russians or the Muslims. And yet a Russian Jewish Kazar, whose ancestors never were Hebrews, can land on the tarmac and become an Instant Israeli and get a nice subsidized home to live in on a plot of land snatched and unpaid for in the 1940's.
In addition to a dedicated dittohead, you are also a Zionist propagandist.
-
That Kazar argument would make a lot more sense if guys like Hitler had given the Eastern European Jews a pass and told them he had nothing against Kazars.
The fact of the matter is that some hard lessons have been learned - - if 60 million armed lunatics come after me and my mum and dad and my wife and her parents and our kids and grandchildren with the idea that we'd all look better as smoke going up a chimney, it is not the time to tell them, hey relax pal, we're just Kazars here. If they say I'm a Jew, that's good enough for me, and even if the Jews today are acting like a bunch of fucking ass-holes, I'm glad to see that they are at least ass-holes with 400 nukes and I hope like hell they can get another 400 without too much trouble.
This Kazar shit is the other side of the coin from Golda Meir's "Who are the Palestinians?" The first step towards solving a problem is to look at the problem in real time, as it exists today. There are occupiers and there are people living under a 40-year occupation. Call them whatever you want to, make up whatever back-story you like about their ancestors, but at the end of the day, one bunch has all the guns and the other bunch lives under them. And THAT is the problem.
-
Palestinians keep getting forcefed, practically from birth, the propoganda of how evil Israel is supposed to be.
Sirs, that goes both ways.
I'm not seeing that, Miss Henny. I'm not reading or hearing of Israeli history books portraying Palestinians as low life scum, egregiously demonizing them in ridicule & caricature, portraying them as not even existing. I'm not saying that the Israeli Government is some pure snow white entity, free of all fault in this mess. What I am saying is that from a propoganda perspective, it's ecessively 1 sided at this point
And on that note, there are many groups trying to work through this problem, because truly, the children of the Palestinians and Israelis are the best hope for the future of the region.
That, I can agree with. Though as I said, 1 side's children isn't getting a very fair starting point, in which to try and build that bridge. Exceedingly hard when you're repetatively told that the other side is the source of all your misery, and that rightfully, they should not even exist in the region, in the 1st place
-
What are the rights of a "People"?
There is so much struggle over the rghts of one race and the legitamacy of another to be "people" that the persons indivdual rights that each of these people should have ,get ignored and evaporate.
Good article in this months National Geographic.
-
Some people are easily taken in propaganda
Pot... kettle.
Of course the region was a deserted wasteland until the Zionists came. No one really lived there... (sarcasm alert)
-
Palestinians keep getting forcefed, practically from birth, the propoganda of how evil Israel is supposed to be.
Sirs, that goes both ways.
I'm not seeing that, Miss Henny. I'm not reading or hearing of Israeli history books portraying Palestinians as low life scum, egregiously demonizing them in ridicule & caricature, portraying them as not even existing. I'm not saying that the Israeli Government is some pure snow white entity, free of all fault in this mess. What I am saying is that from a propoganda perspective, it's ecessively 1 sided at this point
And on that note, there are many groups trying to work through this problem, because truly, the children of the Palestinians and Israelis are the best hope for the future of the region.
That, I can agree with. Though as I said, 1 side's children isn't getting a very fair starting point, in which to try and build that bridge. Exceedingly hard when you're repetatively told that the other side is the source of all your misery, and that rightfully, they should not even exist in the region, in the 1st place
It IS happening. I have watched numerous programs and read numerous items detailing the efforts being made where these kids - usually joining such efforts as teens - are raised with terrible stereotypes of the other side. That is why it is critical that they come together... to breakdown the stereotypes. Israeli or Palestinian, they are all human beings.
-
And on that note, there are many groups trying to work through this problem, because truly, the children of the Palestinians and Israelis are the best hope for the future of the region.
That, I can agree with. Though as I said, 1 side's children isn't getting a very fair starting point, in which to try and build that bridge. Exceedingly hard when you're repetatively told that the other side is the source of all your misery, and that rightfully, they should not even exist in the region, in the 1st place
It IS happening. I have watched numerous programs and read numerous items detailing the efforts being made where these kids - usually joining such efforts as teens - are raised with terrible stereotypes of the other side. That is why it is critical that they come together... to breakdown the stereotypes. Israeli or Palestinian, they are all human beings.
Again, I agree with where it needs to happen, and despite the overwhelming roadblock presented to Palestinian children, I'm glad you see it as happening. I'll remain optimistic
-
>>Or, move the Israelis to the most inhospitable place on the face of the Earth and have them legitimately purchase it from the owner.<<
They did that already, it's called Israel.
I'm always amazed at the ignorance that people show when it comes to Israel's history. I suggest you take some time and do some real research into the history of the the area. You'll find that there never was a country called Palestine, and that Israelis made that area what it is today. "Palestinians" don't exist today, nor did they exist 60 years ago. It's Arabs who create these refugees, and it's Arabs who keep them refugees for their own twisted political purposes.
The facts are the facts. Some people are easily taken in propaganda, some people can read.
Rich, I understand this. As an evangelical Christian, it is clear to me they are entitled to the land of the Philistines and all surrounding territory to include all land at the height of any Jewish hegemony. God gave them this, IMHO.
However, I am offering a real life compromise here. Let's move 'em, lock stock and all, to somewhere else no one will want so the hostility is gone. If anyone like the Palestinians go there and find then and mess with them THERE, then they deserve what they get, regardless what folks like MT might say. Sometimes, you simply must move on and not be controlled by hate.
God will prosper them no matter where they are, so let's start afresh, shall we?
And try not to talk down to someone who is generally on your side. Being as ass doesn't become you. Or, does it?
-
And try not to talk down to someone who is generally on your side. Being as ass doesn't become you. Or, does it?
He does have a tendency to do that :-\
-
>>Of course the region was a deserted wasteland until the Zionists came. No one really lived there... (sarcasm alert)<<
Close, but not quite. The land was legally acquired by Jews who immigrated to the region.
By 1937 there were already 400,000 Jews living there on land they legally purchased... (Reality Alert)
-
The bit about the Kazars is probably true, but the whole argument that that anyone automatically owns real estate because their ancestors once lived there is to me completely bogus. Hitler was a dolt, and some Palestinians, notably Yassir Arafat are also dolts, but they are different kinds of dolts.
I am sure that Hitler was equally willing to execute Kazars or Jews, or Ukranes or Poles, but he was happiest when he could get the odd Pole or Ukraine to help out.
I think the descision of the Kazars to convert was quite crafty and shrewd and was quite admirable. Huge numbers of tribes have vanished and been assimilated and we never meet one anymore. I can't recall ever seeing a Geat, a Visigoth, a Frank or a Schwabian of late.
The Evangelicals are of the opinion that all the Jews need to return to Israel, because they believe that the Book of Revelation predicts that all the Jews must be in Israel, the Third Temple must be rebuilt, and Jesus, the True Messiah, will reappear and give them another chance to recognize Him as the Messiah. He will send those who still don't do this down to eternal hellfire, and the rest will frolic about with all the rest of the good Christians until everyone ascends to Heaven.
This seems rather silly to me. I don't think that there is any chance that (a) all the Jews will ever live in Israel again (they were scattered about before Christ, too- There were many Jews in Alexandria , in fact it was the center of Jewish scholarship, and Paul of Tarsus was, well, from Tarsus, which is in Turkey these days, or is it Syria?) (b) the Temple will be rebuilt (because this is on the land now occupied by the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque) or (c) Jesus will return. I am not sure which of these events is the most improbable, but they are all beyond the odds given by Jimmy the Greek.
In any event, all historical arguments are pretty much bogus. The Palestinians were once Philistines, that is where the name Palestine came from. But they were forceably driven out of their homeland, and that wasn't right. Israel is a colony, and that isn't right, either. I am as willing as the next guy to admit that anyone who was born in a place has trhe right to not be thrown out, and there is no logical reason why the Israelis and the Palestinians cannot learn to live in close proximity to one another without suicide bomb attacks or bulldozing homes. They can duke it out if they wish, but I don't want to pay to arm either side. It is not a problem that I, an American, should have to deal with. I am also for peace in Armenia, Kashmir, and Tibet, but I just don't want pay money or see American troops die for those disputes, either.
Those who know me really well know that I am the 15th great grandson of Anika Janssen, the daughter of the Morganatic marriage of William the Silent and a former nun named Anika Jans, and therefore am sort of an heir to the throne of the Netherlands.
But I am not going to claim my throne. I doubt that I would even if I spoke Dutch, which I don't.
Anika Janssen married Dominie Everardus Bogardus, who was siad to be the first Protestant minister in Nieuw Nederlands, now known as New York, by the way.
I love the way Dutchmen with common names Latinized them Boogart means "farmer". The surname Bogardus is rather like sticking a Rolls Royce grille on a VW.
-
<<Anika Janssen married Dominie Everardus Bogardus, who was siad to be the first Protestant minister in Nieuw Nederlands, now known as New York, by the way.>>
So that makes you and Bogie, what, first cousins fifteen times removed? Cool - - You gotta practice
"Sam, I tolja never to play that song again." Or does it come naturally?
-
I am related to the Bogarduses (and there are still some who spell it that way in upstate NY) by a female ancestor, and I have no info on Humphrey's lineage.
Bogart/Boogart/ Bogaart/ Bogardus all mean "farmer" and are as-common-as dirt names in Flanders and the Netherlands, so it is not too likely that Bogey and I are related. I quit smoking cigarettes in 1967 and the pipe in 1986.
I really like Bogey's films, but I am an ever bigger fan of Steve McQueen, especially in Sand Pebbles, Papillion, the Great Escape, and several more.
McQueen was better at getting across whole biographies with just a look or a pose than any actor before or since.
Among the living I fancy Sean Penn and Johnny Depp.
-
Looks like they're the victims in this instance:
Israeli Attorney General prohibits Gaza electricity cut-off; allows blockade
author Monday October 29, 2007 23:26author by Saed Bannoura - IMEMCauthor email saed at imemc dot org Report this post to the editors
The Israeli Attorney General, Menachem Mazuz, on Monday ruled that the Israeli government should temporarily delay its plan to cut electricity to the 1.4 million residents of the Gaza Strip, but added that it was acceptable for Israel to cut Gaza off from the outside world.
Menachem Mazuz
Menachem Mazuz
Israel had been accused by a number of foreign governments and the United Nations of engaging in ‘collective punishment’ of the Palestinian people by cutting off fuel and food supplies to the Gaza Strip.
Israel controls all the borders of the Gaza Strip, and has imposed a full closure on the border since last September. Last week, hospitals ran out of anesthetic and were unable to perform surgeries.
In the latest attempted punishment of the Palestinian people, the Israeli Defense Minister decided last week to cut off the electricity supply to the people of Gaza, a decision that the Attorney General's ruling puts on the back burner, at least in the short term.
According to the Israeli-based Physicians for Human Rights, at least five Palestinians have died since June after being denied entry into Israel for medical treatment. An additional thirteen people are reported to have died at the Rafah border crossing with Egypt while waiting to cross the border for essential medical treatment.
Israeli forces have closed two of the remaining three border crossings that had been open for humanitarian cases only, leaving just one border crossing available for all of Gaza’s 1.4 million inhabitants. And that border crossing, known as Kerem Shalom, is strictly controlled to allow only a very few cases to cross. Many severe humanitarian cases have been denied passage, and essential goods have been unable to enter.
category gaza strip | israeli politics | news report
http://www.imemc.org/article/51162
-
Lanya.....there are going to be a plethora of instances where the Palestinians are seen as "victims". Does that negate the Isreali men, women & children victims, suffering nearly every day rocket attacks, terrorist attacks, bus bombings, etc.? Are there not victims on both sides?? ::)
-
Does that negate the Isreali men, women & children victims, suffering nearly every day rocket attacks, terrorist attacks, bus bombings, etc.? Are there not victims on both sides??
It is the nature of war to produce victims. The victims are very rarely the leaders whose actions caused there to be victims, which is why thyere continue to be more and more victims.
Gaza is probably the most undesireable place to live on the planet, certianly the most well-known undesireable place.
The Egyptians didn't want it, they gave it away. The Israelis won it and they gave it away, too. There are class differences between Gazans and the people of the West Bank. Gazans are poor and less educated. Gaza is an enormous desert slum, with about a million hapless souls crammed into a place with practically no resources, little water.
Unlike other miserable places on the Earth, the Gazans have an abundance of people to blame: the Israelis, first and foremost, then the PLO, that spent most of the money it got on developments in Ramallah and the rest of the West Bank.
Joe Sacco, in his comic documentary 'Palestine', portrays Gaza as a hopeless place filled with sad and desperate people. I have never read any comic novels more evocative than those of Sacco, who was born in Malta, raised in Australia and educated in Oregon. I don't know what nationality he is, but he must be an American resident, perhaps a citizen. Anyone born in Malta is Maltese forever.
-
Palestinians had no "lands" prior to the UN's decision to return Isreal to it's original location back in the late 40's.
Many of the Palestinians owned property in Jerusalem and elsewhere in areas that are now controlled by Israel. They fled during Israels war of independence and have not been allowed to return.
Now, whether they fled because they were afraid of being caught up in the war, or they fled, as some surmise, expecting to return in a short time after an Arab victory, is irrelevant. israel, once the war was over, has refused to let them return to the homes and property they rightfully own, and has turned it over to others to live in or settle on.
-
<<Joe Sacco, in his comic documentary 'Palestine', portrays Gaza as a hopeless place filled with sad and desperate people. I have never read any comic novels more evocative than those of Sacco, who was born in Malta, raised in Australia and educated in Oregon. I don't know what nationality he is, but he must be an American resident, perhaps a citizen. Anyone born in Malta is Maltese forever.>>
You'd probably like Marjane Satrapi's Persepolis (Iranian Revolution and its sequelae) and (if you haven't already read it) Art Spiegelman's Maus (the Holocaust.) I read Palestine, and liked it a lot. Sacco's got some others out there as well, one of them I believe being set in Sarajevo. Maus was the granddaddy of that kind of political reportage as graphic novel, and IMHO still far and away the best. Spiegelman had the old man's voice down to a "T" and it was a story I couldn't put down.
I think there's nothing like graphic novels for showing the human dimensions of political conflicts and making them understandable on a basic level. They really have a way of cutting through the bullshit and the rationalizations. Spiegelman, for example, is brilliant at showing the realities of the Holocaust, but there is no Jewish answer to Joe Sacco. The problem with a Jewish answer in graphic novel form is that it would either fail to ring true, or if it DID ring true, it would be very apparent who the victims were and who the oppressors were.
-
I recently re-read The Haj by Leon Uris. I highly recommend it.
-
Here's another graphic novel about a journalist in Iraq in 2009.
http://shootingwar.com/chapters/chapter-1/
Shooting War. It's not the greatest but it's OK. Not really going anywhere. Good atmospherics.
-
I recently re-read The Haj by Leon Uris. I highly recommend it.
==============================================
I read this godawful piece of Zionist propaganda years ago. As a valid description of the Palestinians, it sucks most deeply. It is the straight rightwing AIPAC line.
The Palestinians depicted in this piece of trash are portrayed as incompetent boobs ruled by Satanic manipulators. The3 message is: Israelis good, Palestinians bad.
You will get little insight by reading this thing.
Even Abba Eban is more fair to the Palestinians.
-
Palestinians had no "lands" prior to the UN's decision to return Isreal to it's original location back in the late 40's.
Many of the Palestinians owned property in Jerusalem and elsewhere in areas that are now controlled by Israel.
I'm sure they did. Many people in many countries have had land taken from them by Government agencies. Of course that wasn't my point either. My reference to "land" was not someone's private piece of property. I'm referring to a recognized and sanctioned boundry outlining a specific province, or country, There was no land of "Palestine" before or after the Iraelis were allowed to resettle
Now, whether they fled because they were afraid of being caught up in the war, or they fled, as some surmise, expecting to return in a short time after an Arab victory, is irrelevant. israel, once the war was over, has refused to let them return to the homes and property they rightfully own, and has turned it over to others to live in or settle on.
That's arguable, but at this point is a non-starter, especially as it relates to the so-called "Right of Return". There was a war to go along with those who fled for whatever reasons. Israel won that war, and like any victors in a war, rightly or wrongly, have taken what lands they felt necessary to better defend themselves. I truely feel sorry for those inidivual Palestinians who may have owned some personal properties, but as I referenced above, Governments do that bit of unfairness of taking over lands all across the globe. We just a recent Supreme Court decision to allow our Government to perform the task, that much easier (noting the liberal end of the court being the ones that got that passed)
-
There was no land of "Palestine"...
Sure there was. It was a 'mandate', a territory overseen by the British after WW1.
-
There was no land of "Palestine"...
Sure there was. It was a 'mandate', a territory overseen by the British after WW1.
Show me, H. Show me this Palestine "border/land" established prior to the end of WWII, it's outline, and its set-up Government running it, not to mention all the other countries that were recognizing this land as Palestine. I'm all eyes
-
>>Rich, I understand this. As an evangelical Christian, it is clear to me they are entitled to the land of the Philistines and all surrounding territory to include all land at the height of any Jewish hegemony. God gave them this, IMHO.<<
We agree.
>>However, I am offering a real life compromise here. Let's move 'em, lock stock and all, to somewhere else no one will want so the hostility is gone.<<
How do you justify something like this when you admit Israel is clearly their land to befin with? Why on Earth should Israel acquiess to mudrerous terroriists if it's their land by birth? If you're a Christian who knows your Bible, why on Earth would you force Jews off the promised land before you would make Arabs live up to their end of the bargain? Why not do what was intented in the first place? Move the "Palestinians" to Jordon. Any Arabs currently living and working in Israel could certianly stay, but since the Arabs caused the refugee problem, they should do what they should have done years ago and taken in the refugees instead of using them for political gain.
-
>>He does have a tendency to do that ...<<
Just to you sirs. Usually when you sucking up to the left, thinking they'll like you despite you being a Nazi.
-
See what I mean, Professor?
-
Oh come on now sirs, no need to ignore me. You know what I mean, and I'll tell you right now that I do admire your tenacity. Let me tell you this, I don't go after you when you're involved in an argument with someone, yet you feel empowered to do so to me. Why not keep your mouth shut? I have enough to deal with (as do you) without you making smarmy little comments like, " he does have a tendency to do that,"" and the like.
Understand?
-
Oh come on now sirs, no need to ignore me.
Why would I ignore you? If you hadn't noticed, I frequently agree with many of your positions....minus the shrill insultive broadbrushing
Let me tell you this, I don't go after you when you're involved in an argument with someone, yet you feel empowered to do so to me. Why not keep your mouth shut?
Like you Rich, I call them like I see them. As much as I'll go after the left, in order to demonstrate some objectivity, when the right gets out of hand, and starts looking like knute, I'm going to call them on it. When you start broadbrushing the likes of Terra & Tee, I'm going to call you on it. As I said, I agree with probably 85+% of what you talk about. I don't agree with the 15% that includes egregious insults, all Muslims are X, all Palestinians are Y, all liberals are @&#%. That's what I'd consider Tee territory of broadbrushing, and is really beneath what is otherwise pretty solid and accurate commentary
Understand?
Yea, do you? Is it possible to collaborate minus the hyperbolic 15% I referenced above?
-
>>As much as I'll go after the left, in order to demonstrate some objectivity, when the right gets out of hand...<<
Alright. When you make an ass of yourself (which you frequently do) I'll be happy to point it out in the future.
-
By all means. Try to accomplish it without the egregious Tee-like broadbrushing and insults, if that's possible
-
My Plan for Peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians is to disarm both sides and put everyone for a dozen years under a Dutch mandate. The Dutch are tolerant, they are large and strong, and they know how to reclaim land from the sea.
During this time, polders will be built, the Golan Heights will be scooped out and dumped into the Mediterranean. The idea is to build a second Palisrael abiut five miles off the coast of the present one. When it is completed, there will be a drawing, and the people who win will get to choose between the new Palisrael and the older one.
When everyone has settled in and made nice with each other, then the Dutch can go home and return to tulip farming, potsmoking, and wooden shoe wearing, among other things.
-
<<Close, but not quite. The land was legally acquired by Jews who immigrated to the region.>>
Often acquiring large tracts from absentee Turkish landlords in Cairo and evicting thousands of Arab families who had lived and died for generations on those same lands.
<<By 1937 there were already 400,000 Jews living there on land they legally purchased... (Reality Alert)>>
"Reality Alert," my ass. HERE'S the REALITY CHECK that'll stop Rich's Zio-Nazi bullshit dead in its tracks - - the British Census of 1922.
<<The British census of 1922 registered 752,048 inhabitants in Palestine, consisting of 589,177 Palestinian Muslims, 83,790 Palestinian Jews, 71,464 Palestinian Christians (including Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and others) and 7,617 persons belonging to other groups. The corresponding percentage breakdown is 78% Muslim, 11% Jewish, and 9% Christian. Palestinian Bedouin were not counted in the census, but a 1930 British study estimated their number at 70,860.[61]>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian
Cute, huh? In the fifteen years from 1922 to 1937, the Jews in Palestine almost quintuple in population from 84,000 to 400,000 - - an actual increase of 4.76 times the original size. By way of comparison, in TWENTY years from 1920 to 1940, the U.S.A. went from 106 to 132 million, or 1.25 times original size. Adjusted (roughly) to a 15-year period, the increase is only 1.18 times original size. (If the U.S. had shown growth proportional to Jewish population growth in Palestine over roughly the same 15 years, it would have gone from 106 million in 1920 to 505 million by 1935.)
[U.S. figures from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States]
What obviously happened was MASSIVE Jewish immigration into Palestine occurring roughly over the same period of time (1922-1937) as the Nazi rise to power in Germany. Hitler's beer-hall putsch, 1923; accession to power, 1933; Nuremburg racial laws, 1935. To escape from a threat arising entirely in Christian Europe (aided and abetted by Amerikkkan fascists and racists like Charles Lindbergh, his wife Anne and Henry Ford) the Jews of Europe flocked into Palestine and immediately began dispossessing the poor dumb fucking Arabs who lived there. And getting paid Zionist flacks like Leon Uris (for a very generous subsidy) to write best-sellers full of lies and bullshit about their "heroic" exploits. This was really the bottom end of the Darwinian paradigm - - the despised, the weak and the persecuted looking down to find someone even weaker and more despised than themselves to persecute and exploit.
-
The old Zionist bit was that Israel was "a land without people for a people without a land". This wasn't true, but it sounded nice.
Before Wilson's Twenty Points, the idea that each nationality should have its own chunk of real estate was not seen as any sort of ideal. I guess the main instigators of the idea were the Irish and Polish nationalists, and later others who felt that it would make it easier to exploit the former Austro-Hungarian, Russian, and Ottoman Empires once they were split up into bite-size chunks.
At the same time in the US (the 1920's and 1930's), there was a trend to merge several Native American tribes into one reservation.
Here in Dade County in the late 1940's and early 1950's there was a whole lot of former swampland that had been reclaimed. Miami Beach typically had restrictive covenents on most of the property, banning Blacks and especially Jews (and of course there were more Jews who could afford a home). So they combined Ojus, Fulford-by-the-Sea (which wasn't) and several other unincorporated developments and renamed them North Miami Beach. Then they peddled said lots to New Yorkers, most of them Jewish, many of whom bought them sight unseen. No part of North Miami Beach touches any part of any ocean or has a beach. There are a few places that are next to canals or the bay between the area north of Miami Beach and the mainland. But most of NMB is actually within ten or fifteen miles of the beach.
No part of Fulford-by-the-Sea actually touched the Ocean either. This was a 1920's Real Estate deception.
In Broward County we have a Miramar (which means 'seaview") that is about 25 miles from the ocean. It's flat, so there is no chance that anyone standing in Miramar has ever caught a glimpse of the Sea.
-
"1922 registered 752,048 inhabitants in Palestine"
If only it were so sparce now.
-
<<If only it were so sparce now.>>
So you're in favour of rolling back the tidal wave of Jewish immigration into Palestine? Or state-enforced limits on population growth? Or both? (just kidding)
-
Show me, H. Show me this Palestine "border/land" established prior to the end of WWII, it's outline, and its set-up Government running it, not to mention all the other countries that were recognizing this land as Palestine. I'm all eyes.
But not much brains. How hard can it be to do a simple web search.
First result, right at the top of the page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_of_Palestine
Followed by:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Palestine_Mandate.html
http://www.mideastweb.org/mandate.htm
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/palmanda.htm
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1922mandate.html
Seems Palestine was recognized by quite a few people, including the Jews.
There. That entire process took about two minutes. Any further orders, Master?
-
>>There. That entire process took about two minutes. Any further orders, Master?<<
Yes.
Show me where, prior to the British Mandate, there was any country called Palestine. Please define the border and type of governement. Then show me Palestine's borders and type of governement after 1923.
-
But not much brains.....That entire process took about two minutes. Any further orders, Master?
So that's the "civility" & "tone" you wish to precede with? OooooKaaaay. I can't help but recall how completely bent out of shape you got when you thought I was somehow demeaning your intellect (when I never was), and here didn't take long for you to pull precisely the garbage you were condeming me for. :-\
And strange how as of yet, there seemed to be no "land" of Palestine before some mentioned mandate (read; nothing actually done about it) Strange how also as soon as Isreal resettled, all of a sudden there was this "land" of Palestine, coincidentally, right where Isreal was. Go figure
-
<<Show me where, prior to the British Mandate, there was any country called Palestine. Please define the border and type of governement. Then show me Palestine's borders and type of governement after 1923.>>
I think this is what he's looking for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine#Ottoman_rule_.281516_-_1917_CE.29
The Romans joined the province of Judea (which already included Samaria) together with Galilee to form a new province, called by the familiar name of Syria Palaestina.[17]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine#Ottoman_rule_.281516_-_1917_CE.29
During the Roman period, the Iudaea Province (including Samaria) comprised much of modern Palestine, although the Galilee and other northern areas remained administratively distinct. Later, following the Jewish rebellions in the 1st and 2nd centuries CE, Rome united the entire Levant in a new province bearing its Greco-Latin name, Syria-Palaestina.[17][18]
During the Byzantine Period, this entire region (including Syria, Palestine, Samaria, and Galilee) was renamed Palaestina and then subdivided into Diocese I and II. The Byzantines also renamed an area of land including the Negev, Sinai, and the west coast of the Arabian Peninsula as Palaestina Salutoris, sometimes called Palaestina III. Since the Byzantine Period, the Byzantine borders of Palaestina (I and II) have served as a name for the geographic area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Although what he hopes to prove with it is anyone's guess.
-
Sorry Mike, you have provided no such evidence.
There isn't now, nor has there ever been a country called Palestine. If so, you could show me the geography and type of government it has had throughout it's existence. Obviously you can't do that because there has never been such a country or such a government.
Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself though.
-
<<Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself though.>>
I wouldn't even attempt to steal your act, Rich. You seem to hold the franchise on foolishness when it comes to Zionist bullshit around here, and you've done more with that franchise than anyone could reasonably have expected.
"Palestine" was the name of a Province of the Roman Empire, later of the Byzantine Empire and later still was the name of the British Mandate.
What was your point anyway? There was never an independent country named Palestine, so the Jews have the right to permanently subject the three million West Bank Arabs to military occupation without civil rights for the sake of 270,000 Jewish settlers? Using your asinine brand of "logic" there was never a country named the U.S. of A., so the British had the right to subject the colonies to permanent subordinate status? Pa-THET-ic. Absolutely pathetic.
-
>>"Palestine" was the name of a Province of the Roman Empire, later of the Byzantine Empire and later still was the name of the British Mandate.<<
No, the British Mandate was called the British Mandate and it was referred to as Palestine. The British Mandate didn't create Palestine. No one ever created a national homeland in "Palestine since the Jews did 2000 years before. Jews had been immigrateing to the area since 1880. After WWII the British Mandate was created, then just 5 years later the area was divided into Trans Jordon (east of the Jordon River) and Jewish "Palestine" (west of the Jordon River).
These are just a few facts for you to consider. Well, you won't, but there they are.
-
So that's the "civility" & "tone" you wish to precede with? OooooKaaaay. I can't help but recall how completely bent out of shape you got when you thought I was somehow demeaning your intellect (when I never was), and here didn't take long for you to pull precisely the garbage you were condeming me for.
My tone was in response to your demand and its tone. Keep that in mind next time you decide to take that tack with me.
And strange how as of yet, there seemed to be no "land" of Palestine before some mentioned mandate (read; nothing actually done about it) Strange how also as soon as Isreal resettled, all of a sudden there was this "land" of Palestine, coincidentally, right where Isreal was. Go figure
You got your answer. The area was recognized as Palestine for quite some time; not necessarily as an independent country, but as a general name for the entire area. You might have known that if you had taken the time to simply read over the history of the area you decided to jump into a discussion about. Then you might come off sounding more intelligent and informed than you did.
-
So that's the "civility" & "tone" you wish to precede with? OooooKaaaay. I can't help but recall how completely bent out of shape you got when you thought I was somehow demeaning your intellect (when I never was), and here didn't take long for you to pull precisely the garbage you were condeming me for.
My tone was in response to your demand and its tone. Keep that in mind next time you decide to take that tack with me.
Yea, calling me stupid is equivalent to requesting that you show me some physical boudries to support your thesis. Yea, nice try. Might convince knute perhaps, though.
And strange how as of yet, there seemed to be no "land" of Palestine before some mentioned mandate (read; nothing actually done about it) Strange how also as soon as Isreal resettled, all of a sudden there was this "land" of Palestine, coincidentally, right where Isreal was. Go figure
You got your answer. The area was recognized as Palestine for quite some time; not necessarily as an independent country, but as a general name for the entire area. You might have known that if you had taken the time to simply read over the history of the area you decided to jump into a discussion about. Then you might come off sounding more intelligent and informed than you did.
See, did it again. I'm just not intelligent. The SAME thing you were repetatively blasting me for supposedly doing to you. The fact you can't demonstrate any physical boundries that were recognized and upheld as Palestine, especially when Isreal was allowed to resettle, yet I'm the one lacking intelligence. Well, it was fun while it lasted. How's it feel to apparently be me? :-\
-
>>Rich, I understand this. As an evangelical Christian, it is clear to me they are entitled to the land of the Philistines and all surrounding territory to include all land at the height of any Jewish hegemony. God gave them this, IMHO.<<
We agree.
>>However, I am offering a real life compromise here. Let's move 'em, lock stock and all, to somewhere else no one will want so the hostility is gone.<<
How do you justify something like this when you admit Israel is clearly their land to befin with? Why on Earth should Israel acquiess to mudrerous terroriists if it's their land by birth? If you're a Christian who knows your Bible, why on Earth would you force Jews off the promised land before you would make Arabs live up to their end of the bargain? Why not do what was intented in the first place? Move the "Palestinians" to Jordon. Any Arabs currently living and working in Israel could certianly stay, but since the Arabs caused the refugee problem, they should do what they should have done years ago and taken in the refugees instead of using them for political gain.
Well, sometimes, you must compromise in order to reach consensus. I'm not worried on this score; God will take care of the Jews no matter where they are, so big deal, just relocate them. Doesn't matter where; in fact, the worse, the better.
-
<<Jews had been immigrateing to the area since 1880.>>
So what? They've been immigrating into Toronto since about that time too. It's news to me that immigration gives the immigrant the right to take over the country from the majority inhabitants. I don't think we're gonna try that here in Toronto.
<< After WWII the British Mandate was created, then just 5 years later the area was divided into Trans Jordon (east of the Jordon River) and Jewish "Palestine" (west of the Jordon River).>>
Why are you so fixated on names? The real story is in the numbers. In 1922 they were 11% of the population and with the rise of Hitler they quintupled the Jewish population in just 15 years. But they still weren't a majority and they don't have the right to push out the people who were there before them.
<<These are just a few facts for you to consider. Well, you won't, but there they are.>>
Well, I DID consider them. I just don't agree with what you concluded from them. I'm not against a Jewish homeland either. I think they oughtta have one, with lots of nukes and a big army and air force. I just don't think they have the right to treat other people like shit, no matter how badly they've been treated themselves. The Arabs aren't responsible for what they went through during the war.
-
The Arabs aren't responsible for what they went through during the war.
They are the ones that took a military approach in trying to "interact" with Israel, immediately following the war
-
>> ... so big deal, just relocate them. ...<<
There's lots of prophecy tied up in that soil, wouldn't you agree? Since we agree that God gave the Jews the land, wouldn't it be kind of a big deal if they just decided to up and leave? "Say God, we've decided the land you promised us isn't worth the trouble. We're all moving to Jersey."
-
>>Why are you so fixated on names?<<
lol ... So now I'm fixated on names? You're the one attempting to create a country out of whole cloth. I'm just giving you a simple fact. There was NEVER a country named Palestine, no matter how much you wish there where. It's a lie created by Israels enemies that usefull idiots perpetuate. Jews have always been there, and they always will be. "Palestinians" don't want a country, they want to kill Jews. If they wanted a country they have had many opportunities to either create one, or join one. The real agenda for Arabs in the area is to burning desire to kill ever Jew they can find.
If the Bush Doctrine reaches fruition sometime in the future, and Democracies replace the dictatorships currently ruling the majority of Arab countires, Israel will have peace and so will the rest of the Middle East. Until that happens Israel has every right of sovereign nation to protect itself against the monsters promising Jewish genocide.
-
I'm just not intelligent. The SAME thing you were repetatively blasting me for supposedly doing to you. The fact you can't demonstrate any physical boundries that were recognized and upheld as Palestine, especially when Isreal was allowed to resettle, yet I'm the one lacking intelligence.
Read.
Learn.
Then get back to me.
-
>>Then get back to me.<<
That would obviously be a waste of time. The point has been settled. There has never been a country called Palestine.
-
There has never been a country called Palestine.
Never said there was.
Read.
Learn.
Then get back to me.
-
>>Then get back to me.<<
Why bother? There's no debate. There has never been a country called Palestine, nor has there been Palestinians until Arabs invented them.
-
There has never been a country called Palestine.
Never said there was.
Which of course, was the whole point of this tangent. Nor a City, nor a county, nor ANYTHING remotely passing as a recognized border of LAND, governed as Palestine, either before or after the war, where Israel was allowed to resettle oy
Read. Learn.
Good suggestion. I would wholeheartedly recommend it. And it would have nothing to do with any lack of intelligence on your part, (just in case you were about to spring a sprocket, that that's what I was trying to claim)
-
<<So now I'm fixated on names? . . . I'm just giving you a simple fact. There was NEVER a country named Palestine, no matter how much you wish there where. It's a lie created by Israels enemies that usefull idiots perpetuate. >>
OK, there was never an independent nation-state called Palestine. There was a geographical region called Palestine. There was a Roman province named Palestine-Syria. There was a Byzantine province named Palestine. There was a British mandate over Palestine. "Palestine" was never a secret word unknown to the world. It was not a gibberish word meaning nothing. It was understood to mean a region, a part of the world. If at any time in the last 2,000 years, a grown man anywhere in the Mediterranean area had said "Palestine? What IS that? I never heard of it," you would think he was a fucking idiot.
There was never a country called "America." There was never a country called "United States of America." Then one day there was. Things change. Time marches on. Does anyone argue the Americans had no right to a country called the U.S.A. because prior to its formation, there wasn't a country called "America?" Your argument is beyond silly, Rich. It's basically absurd. It makes no sense.
<<Jews have always been there, and they always will be. >>
They were there a long time ago, and then for well over a thousand years, they were a tiny minority. In 1880, under the Ottoman Empire, they were 5% of the population. FIVE PER CENT. http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575008_9/Israel.html
"Always been there" takes on a whole new meaning when you're referring to a 5% minority. You might as well say that blacks have "always been there" in America, and probably in much higher numbers than 5%. Does this give them the right to throw open the borders to unlimited black legal and illegal immigration until enough of them get here to push the whites off their land and establish their own state?
<<"Palestinians" don't want a country, they want to kill Jews. If they wanted a country they have had many opportunities to either create one, or join one. >>
Why do you say this? It's obviously a lie and everyone can see that. All you are doing is making the Jews look like a bunch of fucking liars and bad liars at that. OF COURSE they want a country. They want a country called Palestine. They don't want to be part of Israel and they don't want to leave their homes. They want their own country, to be masters in their own home. Who in their place would not? Do you have any idea how absolutely fucking stupid you look when you try to maintain this bullshit? There probably isn't one reader in this entire group who could take it seriously.
<<The real agenda for Arabs in the area is to burning desire to kill ever Jew they can find.>>
And of course the occupation has nothing to do with that. They LOVE having been living under military occupation with no rights for 40 years. Who wouldn't? They love it when they're stopped on the road at checkpoints every few miles, that a giant wall goes up all around them, that their homes and orchards are bulldozed, that their children are stoned and beaten by settlers. Who wouldn't love it?
<<You're the one attempting to create a country out of whole cloth.>>
Like THAT'S never been done before. The U.S.A. for example. The Republic of India for another. Germany and Italy, two more. Pakistan. Indonesia. Canada. Countries ARE created out of whole cloth. Or did you think they were already there when the earth cooled?
<<If the Bush Doctrine reaches fruition sometime in the future, and Democracies replace the dictatorships currently ruling the majority of Arab countires . . . >>
Well, let's see. The Bush doctrine, eh? Aren't you a little bit confused about it? If the Bush doctrine is about allowing Democracies to replace dictatorships, maybe you can explain why Bush tried to undermine and overthrow the democratically elected Venezuelan and Palestinian governments. That would be very interesting. Also, I'd like to know why the dictatorships of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt are still supported by Bush, as they have been since he first took office. Also how come this promoter of democracy in Arab lands doesn't tell the Israelis to allow the West Bank Arabs to vote in elections to determine how they will be governed? It seems a little strange for such a strong supporter of "democracy" in the Arab world to also be supporting forty years of military occupation with no end in sight for the three million Arabs of the West Bank, doesn't it?
<< Israel will have peace and so will the rest of the Middle East.>>
By continuing its military occupation, it will have peace? Seems to me that if a military occupation was going to produce peace it would have done so in forty years. Comes a time when you gotta realize that this is not the way to produce peace. Would they plant an apple tree and give it forty years to produce an apple?
<< Until that happens Israel has every right of sovereign nation to protect itself against the monsters promising Jewish genocide.>>
I hope that's how the millions of West Bank Arabs see it. "Well, sure it sucks to be occupied for 40 years, but hell, we're just a bunch of genocide-promising monsters, so we deserve it. Hey, whaddaya think? Should we stop promising genocide and get the occupation off our backs? Nah, let's give it another 40 years. This is FUN!" What I really can't understand is how you yourself don't recognize how absolutely fucking STUPID your argument sounds. Do you REALLY think that the Jews are occupying the West Bank (and settling it as fast as they can) because there are "monsters" who are "promising" Jewish genocide? Why are they rushing in to build settlements and raise their kids right next door to all these "monsters?" Given their experience with previous promises of Jewish genocide, why don't they kill every "monster" who "promises genocide?" Haven't they had 40 years to do it? You know and I know that there are powerful political parties backing the settler movement who make no secret of why they settle the West Bank and need to drive out the Arabs - - they claim it is land promised to the Jews by God and that to settle it is a sacred duty of every Jew. Why insult everyone's intelligence by claiming that the Jews need to settle the land to protect themselves from monsters? The Jews themselves don't even resort to this bullshit.
-
MT: <<The Arabs aren't responsible for what they [the Jews] went through during the war.>>
sirs: <<They [the Arabs] are the ones that took a military approach in trying to "interact" with Israel, immediately following the war>>
================================================================================
The Jews were much better organized and prepared than the Arabs, and struck first, using their underground armies to seize the Arab areas of the UN Partition Plan as soon as the Mandate ended and the last British troops left. Literally within hours. The Palestinian Arabs had no underground armies, and appealed to the Arab Legion (a British-officered Jordanian Bedouin force, reputedly one of the best fighting organizations in the Middle East) to defend the lands that the UN had allocated to them. The Legion moved in and other Arab forces followed. The Jews fought them to a standstill.
I'm sure there were a lot of missed opportunities and both sides made serious errors, but it's not correct to say that the Arabs "are the ones that took a military approach." That's the kind of bullshit that Leon Uris and others were paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to put into third-rate novels like "Exodus" cranked out specially for the occasion, but it's as far from the truth as you can get. The Jews struck first and the Arab Legion very reluctantly responded to the pleas of the Palestinian Arabs when no one else seemed ready to come to their rescue.
-
MT: <<The Arabs aren't responsible for what they [the Jews] went through during the war.>>
sirs: <<They [the Arabs] are the ones that took a military approach in trying to "interact" with Israel, immediately following the war>>
================================================================================
The Jews were much better organized and prepared than the Arabs, and struck first
Only AFTER the military impediments & blockades placed by Egypt, as well as Jordan, with the massing of their militaries on Israel's borders. It was shrewd not to wait until the Arabs unleashed everything. This tangent regarding who stuck who 1st, has already been hashed over a multitude of times, and even Js, no allie of Israel what-so-ever, conceded how Israel was provoked to act.
-
<<Only AFTER the military impediments & blockades placed by Egypt, as well as Jordan, with the massing of their militaries on Israel's borders. It was shrewd not to wait until the Arabs unleashed everything. This tangent regarding who stuck who 1st, has already been hashed over a multitude of times, and even Js, no allie of Israel what-so-ever, conceded how Israel was provoked to act. >>
I think there has been a shift in context here. I was discussing the 1948 war. When I said that the Arabs did not cause the problems the Jews had experienced during the war (WWII) you responded that after the war (which I took to be after WWII) the Arabs interacted with the Jews with military force, I assumed you were referring to the War of Independence of 1948, which began as soon as the Mandate ended. That's the only conflict I have been referring to in this thread.
-
Rich - There has never been a country called Palestine.
Moi - Never said there was.
Sirs - Which of course, was the whole point of this tangent.
No, the whole point of this tangent was your quote that "There was no land of "Palestine"..."
You did not say country; neither did I. I merely pointed out that the land in question has been known as Palestine for quite some time.
Like I said, read, learn, repeat as necessary...
-
>>OK, there was never an independent nation-state called Palestine.<<
Thank you for admitting you were wrong.
-
Rich - There has never been a country called Palestine.
Moi - Never said there was.
Sirs - Which of course, was the whole point of this tangent.
No, the whole point of this tangent was your quote that "There was no land of "Palestine"..."
And I made it PAINFULLY CLEAR that I was asking for borders, legitimate recognized boundries, as some recognized governmental run body of LAND, that would validate your claim of Palestine. I've been focused on the OBJECTIVE part of this tangent "Land", while you've been trying to redirect it to subjective term "Palestine", with interjections of some Palestinians who owned private property. Thankfully, this is now cleared up, as you yourself have conceded there is no such governmental agency or recognized/organized run modern day Palestine, pre or post war. Why it took this long and required to drain this much water from a rock to get this concession is beyond me. Outside of perhaps some tweaked need to try and prove me wrong
-
Maybe you should read the Mandate as it was given to Britain in 1923 and see what boundaries it specified. I told you, you have your answer. I'm not your lackey, to spell it all out for you.
...you yourself have conceded there is no such governmental agency or recognized/organized run modern day Palestine, pre or post war.
I conceded nothing. The mandate gave Britain administrative control over the region, until Israel was granted its independence. Then followed the war of 1948, and Israel's grab of all the land it could get and claim as a 'buffer'.
So don't be so arrogant as to claim some sort of victory yet.
-
Your problem here H, which is a frequent problem, is that you have taken it upon yourself to establish my parameters of the discussion. You concluded that in "Land", I was obviously referring to some nomadic region of area, kinda like the Sahara (though I think that even the Sahara, has more definative boundries than modern day "Palestine"). It's similar to when the left claims what Bush really meant about "Mission Accomplished" or "Mushroom cloud". Despite my crystal clear follow-up query that made it specific to an organized region & borders, consistent with a recognized country, you're still convinced that my original reference remains focused on some "area", which you could then supposedly debunk
You were wrong in the 1st place, which is why it took this long to squeeze water from your pre-disposed rock of rhetoric. You concession is duely noted.
-
Um, no.
Like I said: Read.
There are borders.
There is a government administration.
Answered your follow-up before you followed-up, if you will.
See you around, Sirs. I've had enough of your arrogance for one day.
-
Rich; There has never been a country called Palestine.
Never said there was.
Point thus conceded, case closed.
-
>>And I made it PAINFULLY CLEAR that I was asking for borders, legitimate recognized boundries, as some recognized governmental run body of LAND, that would validate your claim of Palestine.<<
I don't see how we could have made it clearer, but then we're talking to people who don't know the meaning of the word "is." We asked for borders, we asked for form of government. They can provide neither. All we get is name calling in return.
Case closed.
-
The whole debate about whether or not there was previously a country named Palestine is ludicrous. For the record, it appears there never was such a country. A more irrelevant factoid is hard to imagine.
Also for the record, there are three million Arabs who have been living under Israeli military occupation in the West Bank for forty years and another 1.2 million only recently freed from Israeli military occupation in the Gaza Strip. These four million oppressed Arabs don't want to live under military occupation any more. The Jews have no right under international law to continue to occupy lands seized in war and in fact have been told numerous times by the UN that their ongoing occupation is illegal. Those four million oppressed Arabs want their own country and they want to call it Palestine. It is nobody else's business what they call it. They could call it A-7 if they wanted to. Whether or not the name was previously used as a country name means absolutely NOTHING.
Put another way, if the Jews' best argument against a two-state solution is that there was never a country called Palestine before, they are in BIG trouble. There was never a soft drink called Coca Cola before the first Coke was created, but that doesn't mean that the makers of Coca Cola aren't allowed to make it and sell it under that name.
-
The whole debate about whether or not there was previously a country named Palestine is ludicrous. For the record, it appears there never was such a country. A more irrelevant factoid is hard to imagine.
Also for the record, leave it to Tee (& probably H), to take the most important component to this tangent, and declare it irrevelent. Thus negating anything else that would dare debunk their POV
Put another way, if the Jews' best argument against a two-state solution is that there was never a country called Palestine before, they are in BIG trouble.
I'd like to know who's making that arguement. Care to cite some sources? The pointing out that there was no country called Palestine for the Israeli to have pushed aside its citizenry and simply replaced it with their own country, with the aide of the UN, is merely a fact. There are FAR bigger arguements agianst the reality of a 2 state solution ever materializing. One of the biggest, if not the biggest is that a component of the current Palestinian Governming body (Hamas) has pretty much declared Israel is to be wiped out from the area completely. Hard to get around that monkey wrench
I hope those Palestinian & Israeli kids, that Miss Henny was referring to can grow up fast, to fix their mess. I sure don't see the adults accomplishing anything soon
-
This thread is similar to the current issues in the Palestininan area -- clusterf&**k. No progress is being made. Why not move on to more greener pastures. Geesh!
-
Everyone knows what the terms for Palestinian borders would be. The thing is that neither Israel nor Palestine will elect anyone who will agree to them.
Eventually, the Arabs will outnumber the Jews in Israel itself, and this will be settled by an election and a one-party state with no special privileges for Jews. Abba Eban predicted this long ago, and it is just as inevitable now as it was then.
A country with an established religion and special rights for those who belong to it is probably the most poisonous idea in history. Israel is doomed, eventually.
-
A country with an established religion and special rights for those who belong to it is probably the most poisonous idea in history.
I agree that this is part of the problem.
Another part of the problem is that Palestinians aspire to the same sort of state.
Is overpopulateing your Nation for the sake of voteing strength really a good idea?
If it produces a Nation it will produce a poverty stricken one.
-
This thread is similar to the current issues in the Palestininan area -- clusterf&**k. No progress is bieng made. Why not move on to more greener pastures. Geesh!
What you said, Professor. This is going to go down in history as one of the Dead Horses of the Saloon.
Although, as I will be back over on the "East Bank" permanently in less than 2 weeks (decided to move in December rather than coming back) I will re-extend my invitation to all who want to visit the Holy Land, with special excursions through West Bank and Gaza for the regular naysayers.
-
I agree that this is part of the problem.
Another part of the problem is that Palestinians aspire to the same sort of state.
Well, this was not true until Hamas came along. Hamas at the beginning was aided by the Israelis, by the way.
The Israelis also aided the Shiite Lebanese, who formed Hezbollah, in order to destabilize Lebanon.
Is overpopulateing your Nation for the sake of voteing strength really a good idea?
If it produces a Nation it will produce a poverty stricken one.
The Israelis have been recruiting people to come to Israel from Russia, Ukraine and other parts of the USSR. The proof of identity is minimal, and rarely scrutinized.
Israel is a beggar nation: a huge amount of its money comes as charity from the USA and other countries.
There are many fewer people who send vast amounts of money to the Palestinian entity.
What we are witnessing is a couple of people shooting themselves in the foot very slowly.
-
sirs: <<Also for the record, leave it to Tee (& probably H), to take the most important component to this tangent, and declare it irrevelent. Thus negating anything else that would dare debunk their POV>>
Well, on the theory that we're all here to learn something, I'm certainly open to new ideas. Suppose you tell me WHY it is relevant to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute to determine whether or not a country named Palestine (as opposed to a province of one or two world empires) ever existed before. And then, if it is relevant, why it is "the most important component to this tangent." And while you're at it, why "this tangent" has any significance at all in the overall debate over the conflict.
XO (responding to plane): <<Well, this [that Palestinians want a state with an established religion and special privileges for its followers) was not true until Hamas came along. Hamas at the beginning was aided by the Israelis, by the way.>>
Too true. The main Palestinian party was the secular Fatah, Yasser Arafat's party. The Jews began to build up the more religious Hamas as a counter-weight to Fatah, hoping to bleed Fatah support into a rival party in a traditional divide-and-rule ploy. However an Islamic Palestinian state would be a problem for the citizens themselves to sort out. A similar Jewish state becomes a regional problem simply because it's viewed as highly offensive not only to its own religious minorities but because it pisses off the surrounding states as well. It is the sheer weight of numbers that makes such a state non-viable, even though in principle it should be no more offensive than an Islamic state. At some point in the future, given the demographics, it will become objectionable for an additional reason, as the Arabs will outnumber the Jews within the borders of Israel itself,sooner if the West Bank is included, and democracy itself, even for Israeli citizens, will have to be abandoned.
sirs: <<I'd like to know who's making that arguement. [that there never was a country called Palestine before, so the Palestinians do not really want their own country.] Care to cite some sources? >>
Huh? Were we reading the same thread? Rich was making that argument. Right here. This thread.
-
Point thus conceded, case closed.
Hard to concede a point I was never trying to make, eh?
Let me put it in simple terms you might understand.
You said there was no land called Palestine.
I proved there was, by pointing you to sites mentioning Palestine as a mandate set aside for the British to administer after WWI.
Then you decided to change your parameters and claim there were no borders and no government; both of these, however were provided for in the aforementioned mandate.
I never said Palestine was a country, and as far as I can see you haven't asked me to prove that it was. It was an area that has existed for hundreds of ears, that was properly delineated in the Palestine Mandate, and placed under British governmental administration.
I have conceded nothing. Your arrogance in assuming I have is, to put it mildly, annoying. If you want to discuss the issue without it, let me know. If not, I'm done with you.
-
This thread is similar to the current issues in the Palestininan area -- clusterf&**k. No progress is bieng made. Why not move on to more greener pastures. Geesh!
What you said, Professor. This is going to go down in history as one of the Dead Horses of the Saloon.
Although, as I will be back over on the "East Bank" permanently in less than 2 weeks (decided to move in December rather than coming back) I will re-extend my invitation to all who want to visit the Holy Land, with special excursions through West Bank and Gaza for the regular naysayers.
Just for curiosity and you certainly do not have to answer, why would you want to move INTO a contentious zone when you could live HERE?
-
>>A country with an established religion and special rights for those who belong to it is probably the most poisonous idea in history.<<
I suppose this represents the deathnel for all the Islamic countries as well. I would suggest thought that Israel does allow Arabs Israelis to vote and hold office. Based on that alone I think your death wish for Israel will come swifter to the Islamic regimes.
-
<<I would suggest thought that Israel does allow Arabs Israelis to vote and hold office.>>
Interesting article on the current status of Jews in Iran
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Jews#Current_status_in_Iran
Apparently they cannot hold senior positions in the military or government (I understand similar restrictions apply in Israel to Arabs) and are barred by law from the judiciary and from being the head of a public school. I'm not sure about the reciprocity of the latter restrictions regarding Israeli Arabs and Muslims, but I'd love to know if in fact there are ANY Arab judges or heads of public schools in Israel.
Jews can vote in Iran and in fact, like the Zoroastrians, are guaranteed that at least one member of the legislature will represent the interests of the Jewish community in Iran. The current Jewish parliamentarian has sent a letter to Ahmadinejad protesting against his Holocaust denials.
Also from the same source, the Iranian statute regarding the amount of "blood money" due from the murderer or his family to the family of the victim was amended in 2002 so that the amount payable on the killing of a Jewish, Christian or Zoroastrian man was made equal to what would have been paid for a Muslim man.
-
>> I'm not sure about the reciprocity of the latter restrictions regarding Israeli Arabs and Muslims, but I'd love to know if in fact there are ANY Arab judges or heads of public schools in Israel.<<
Examples of political, judicial and military representatives
Knesset: Arab Israelis have been elected to every Knesset, and currently hold 12 of its 120 seats. Two Arabs have served as full government ministers: Salah Tarif, a Druze, served as a Minister Without Portfolio for ten months in 2001;[110] and Raleb Majadele was appointed as minister without portfolio on 28 January 2007.[111][112] The appointment of Majadele was criticized by Yisrael Beiteinu MK Esterina Tartman who said that the appointment was "a lethal blow to Zionism," and that it damages "Israel's character as a Jewish state." Tartman's comments drew condemnation across the mainstream Israeli political spectrum.[113] Yisrael Beiteinu party leader Avigdor Liberman explained that they had no problem with the appointment of an Arab but "The problem here is the timing and the fact that a minister in the State of Israel (Amir Peretz who chose the appointment) is using the tools he has wrongfully in order to promote himself politically".[114] Meanwhile Arab lawmakers called the appointment an attempt to "whitewash Israel's discriminatory policies against its Arab minority".[115]
Nawaf Massalha, an Arab Muslim, has served in various junior ministerial roles, including Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs since 1999.[116] The first female Arab MP was Hussniya Jabara, a Muslim Arab from central Israel, who was elected in 1999.[117]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel#Legal_and_political_status
Supreme Court: Abdel Rahman Zuabi, a secular Muslim from northern Israel, was the first Arab on the Israeli Supreme Court, serving a 9-month term in 1999. In 2004, Salim Jubran, a Christian Arab from Haifa descended from Lebanese Maronites, became the first Arab to hold a permanent appointment on the Court. Jubran's expertise lies in the field of criminal law.[118]
Foreign Service: Ali Yahya, an Arab Muslim, became the first Israeli Arab ambassador in 1995 when he was appointed ambassador to Finland. He served until 1999, and in 2006 was appointed ambassador to Greece. Other Arab ambassadors include Walid Mansour, a Druze, appointed ambassador to Vietnam in 1999, and Reda Mansour, also a Druze, a former ambassador to Ecuador. Mohammed Masarwa, an Arab Muslim, was Consul-General in Atlanta. In 2006, Ismail Khaldi was appointed Israeli consul in San Francisco, becoming the first Bedouin consul of the State of Israel.[119]
Israel Defence Force: Arab Generals in the IDF include Major General Hussain Fares, commander of Israel's border police, and Major General Yosef Mishlav, head of the Israeli Home Front Command and current Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories.[120] Both are members of the Druze community.
-
I suppose this represents the deathnel for all the Islamic countries as well. I would suggest thought that Israel does allow Arabs Israelis to vote and hold office. Based on that alone I think your death wish for Israel will come swifter to the Islamic regimes.
=========================================
Islamic countries that legally consider Muslims have more rights than non Muslims are, like Israel, a bad idea, and for the same reasons.
Mohammad, as a politician, was an asshole, or at least modern times have rendered him to be one. I think he was an improvement on the anarchic chaos that preceded him, but still, Sharia Law and Islamic states are a really bad idea. But so is Israel.
-
Point thus conceded, case closed.
Hard to concede a point I was never trying to make, eh?
Let me put it in simple terms you might understand. You said there was no land called Palestine.
Ahh, again with the intellectually challenged swipe. 3times now, and yet I'll continue to refrain from lowering to your level. One last time, I clearly referenced with the follow-ups regarding LAND as some recognized governing piece of property, akin to any other land called...ohh, Los Angeles, Delaware, Canada, Syria, etc. As I said, you took it on your self to establish my parameters, and when you were called on it, kept perseverating on a point I never made. No one is denying there aren't Palestinians, or that there was some "mandate" on paper how there should have been. POINT being, there was NOT. There is & was NO Palestine, in the manner of speaking that I've been consistently referring to. Which of course now BOTH you and Tee have conceded is the case
-
There has been a Palestine and a people called first Philistines, and then Palestinians, for over two thousand years. It is likely that Palestine was never self-governing, or ruled by a Palestinian. But that does not mean that the poeple called Palestinians are not therefore entited to want or have their own country.
-
And even though Xo now also concedes that there is & was no Governing bordered modern day land called Palestine, no one is claiming they shouldn't have their country. One wonders why their Arab brethren didn't take any initiative over the last 1000+years help bring that about? One doesn't have to wonder much however why they (their Arab brethren) are working so hard to imply that "Palestine" rightfully exists pretty much where Israel currently is located
-
<<And even though Xo now also concedes that there is & was no Governing bordered modern day land called Palestine, no one is claiming they shouldn't have their country. One wonders why their Arab brethren didn't take any initiative over the last 1000+years help bring that about? >>
Huh? For about 90% of the last 1000+ years, their Arab brethren didn't have their own country either. They had tribes, the tribes had a poorly-defined territory to protect against encroachers, and they constantly raided one another. It was a form of social organization that worked for them. Nation-states and national wars was a form of social organization that worked for the Europeans. Then they had a Caliphate which some of them want to restore and then they were a part of the Ottoman Empire until 1918.
<<One doesn't have to wonder much however why they (their Arab brethren) are working so hard to imply that "Palestine" rightfully exists pretty much where Israel currently is located>>
Well, if you were following the census figures posted in this thread, it's because that is where most of the people now calling themselve "Palestinians" or their grandparents and great-grandparents were living until 1948, when the Zionists declared a Jewish state there and drove them off that land.
-
>> But that does not mean that the poeple called Palestinians are not therefore entited to want or have their own country.<<
Which country would that be? I mean, since you admit there has never been a "Palestine"? They do have a country actually. It's called Jordon. But since these murdering animals attempted to do to Jordon what they're doing to Israel (Jordon crushed them like flies, which is what Israel should do), Jordon won't have them. I think some nice blue State should find room for them. California has room, and they'd like the climate.
-
<<Which country would that be?>>
The land they're living on now would be a good start. Most people want a homeland where they live. That's what it means when they say, "master in their own home."
<< I mean, since you admit there has never been a "Palestine"? >>
If they want a country called Palestine, why can't they have one? Why can't they call it whatever they like as long as there isn't another country currently using the same name?
<<They do have a country actually. It's called Jordon. >>
That's funny, cuz they never lived there. They lived on the West Bank where they are now, or they lived in Israel, which they were driven out of, but none of them lived in Jordan. The ones who were born in Jordan are already Jordanians, not Palestinians.
<<But since these murdering animals attempted to do to Jordon what they're doing to Israel (Jordon crushed them like flies, which is what Israel should do), Jordon won't have them. >>
They're not any more "murdering animals" than the Israelis are. Less in fact, since the Israelis have killed way more Arabs than Arabs have killed Israelis. There's no reason in the world for the Jordanians to take in the Palestinians, sacrificing their own land and space to make up for what Israel stole from the Palestinians. The obvious answer is to kick the Jews out of the West Bank and let the Arabs who live there have it. They'll get it anyway sooner or later.
<< I think some nice blue State should find room for them. California has room, and they'd like the climate.>>
Since many of the Jewish settlers seem to have come from New York, I think the nice blue state should be New York and it should take in all the Jewish settlers that it sent to the West Bank in the first place. And don't worry, none of them have given up their U.S. citizenship. That's the first place they WILL run to when the tide begins to shift. It's no California, but they'll be so glad to escape the West Bank, they'll put up with it gladly.
-
Since many of the Jewish settlers seem to have come from New York, I think the nice blue state should be New York and it should take in all the Jewish settlers that it sent to the West Bank in the first place. And don't worry, none of them have given up their U.S. citizenship. That's the first place they WILL run to when the tide begins to shift. It's no California, but they'll be so glad to escape the West Bank, they'll put up with it gladly.
Then they will vote.
How will New Yorks Congressional deligation be affected?
-
<<Then they [Jewish settlers fleeing the West Bank] will vote.
<<How will New Yorks Congressional deligation be affected?>>
Not much. They're already in thrall to the Zio-Nazis. Just ask Dov Hikind. He makes them and breaks them.
-
>>That's funny, cuz they never lived there. They lived on the West Bank where they are now, or they lived in Israel, which they were driven out of, but none of them lived in Jordan.<<
Mike, you obviously haven't been reading your history. As I've said before, by 1923 there were 400,000 Jews living in what you call Palestine, specifically what is now known as Israel. When Israel was formed, the whole idea was any Arab who wanted to leave Israel could simply cross the Jordon River into Jordon. A lot of them did. Some of those were the terrorist type and were either kicked out or exterminated by the Jordanian governement. When the War of Independence started, these Arabs were encouraged to go back to "Palestine" because Israel was sure to lose the war. But of course they didn't lose the war, and Jordon wouldn't allow these people back into Jordon which created the political refugee problem we have today.
>>The ones who were born in Jordan are already Jordanians, not Palestinians.<<
We've already established that there cannot be Palestinians because there has never been a Palestine.
>>They're not any more "murdering animals" than the Israelis are.<<
Of course they are. All we have to do is look at their actions. They target women and children. They target civilians. They use their own women and children as human shields and as human bombs. That to me is a murdering animal.
>>Less in fact, since the Israelis have killed way more Arabs than Arabs have killed Israelis.<<
When you're being attacked the the idea. Kill more of them than they kill of you. Good for Israel.
>>There's no reason in the world for the Jordanians to take in the Palestinians, sacrificing their own land and space to make up for what Israel stole from the Palestinians.<<
Once again, they couldn't steal land that was theirs in the first place. And again, Jordon was created for Arabs to live in after Trans Jordon was divided to form Israel and Jordon.
>>The obvious answer is to kick the Jews out of the West Bank and let the Arabs who live there have it. They'll get it anyway sooner or later.<<
Arabs haven't been able to remove the Jews for 60 years, what makes you think a bunch of people who can't run an electric plant can take down the Israelis? As for the West Bank, Israel has tried to give the Arabs 95 percent of what they wanted, but they refused. They're not really interested in a settlement, they want to kill Jews, that's all they want. Once they kill all the Jews, they'll go back to killing each other.
>>Since many of the Jewish settlers seem to have come from New York, I think the nice blue state should be New York and it should take in all the Jewish settlers that it sent to the West Bank in the first place.<<
Huh? Actually most of them have come From Europe, many from Africa, and from all over the Middle East. Without running the numbers I'd say only a small percentage have come from America. Anyway, New York is a fine blue State. A perfect place for "Palestinians" to mix with the people who support them. I imagine when the first bomb goes off, some minds will be changed.
-
There's no reason in the world for the Jordanians to take in the Palestinians, sacrificing their own land and space to make up for what Israel stole from the Palestinians. The obvious answer is to kick the Jews out of the West Bank and let the Arabs who live there have it. They'll get it anyway sooner or later.
See Miss Henny? This is the mindset that compliments that of Hamas & Co that makes the children of Isrealis' & Palestinians' work of trying to bring about peaceful co-existance, virtually impossible :-\
-
<<See Miss Henny? This is the mindset that compliments that of Hamas & Co that makes the children of Isrealis' & Palestinians' work of trying to bring about peaceful co-existance, virtually impossible >>
The "peaceful coexistence" that most sane and normal people have in mind is that between Israel within its pre-1967 borders and a Palestinian state consisting of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip - - which is not gonna happen with 270,000 recently-arrived Jewish settlers enjoying West Bank land recently stolen from its Arab owners.
-
We've already established that there cannot be Palestinians because there has never been a Palestine.
=================================================================
So there cannot be any Kurds, because there has never been a Kurdistan.
There were no Jews for 2,000 years because there was no Judeah.
I think what has been established is that you a propaganda-spouting Zionist sympathizer. No one believe this crap.
-
<<See Miss Henny? This is the mindset that compliments that of Hamas & Co that makes the children of Isrealis' & Palestinians' work of trying to bring about peaceful co-existance, virtually impossible >>
The "peaceful coexistence" that most sane and normal people have in mind is that between Israel within its pre-1967 borders and a Palestinian state consisting of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip - - which is not gonna happen with 270,000 recently-arrived Jewish settlers enjoying West Bank land recently stolen from its Arab owners.
Let's even pretend that your selected distortion of facts is so, the mindset I was referencing "The obvious answer is to kick the Jews out of the West Bank and let the Arabs who live there have it." is precisely the kind of mindset that will PREVENT any form of peaceful resolution, regardless how hard the Isreali & Palestinian children work
-
>>So there cannot be any Kurds, because there has never been a Kurdistan.<<
You've got a point there XO. So let's say that there have never been citizens of a country called Palestine.
>>There were no Jews for 2,000 years because there was no Judeah.<<
Jews are described as members of the Jewish religion. Since they were still members during that 2000 years, they were still Jews.
>>I think what has been established is that you a propaganda-spouting Zionist sympathizer. No one believe this crap.<<
And you are of course are an anti Semitic Nazi terrorist sympathizer who everyone despises. As for believing what I'm saying, I realize the truth is like holy water to vampires for you people.
-
<<Let's even pretend that your selected distortion of facts is so, the mindset I was referencing "The obvious answer is to kick the Jews out of the West Bank and let the Arabs who live there have it." is precisely the kind of mindset that will PREVENT any form of peaceful resolution, regardless how hard the Isreali & Palestinian children work>>
Gee, that's really too bad. I was kinda hoping for a peaceful resolution, the kind where the Jews get the West Bank AND Israel and the Arabs all get to fuck themselves up the ass with rusty rebars and a big warm thank-you from Rich and his Zio-Nazi pals. It certainly will be hard to see all that hard work of the children ignored by the political leaders of Israel and Palestine, instead of being enacted into state policy as everyone really expected it to be.
-
<<Mike, you obviously haven't been reading your history. As I've said before, by 1923 there were 400,000 Jews living in what you call Palestine, specifically what is now known as Israel.>>
LOL. Rich, I've been reading my history, but we have a bigger problem: YOU aren't even reading your own posts. Here, just for laughs, I posted some of your previous Zio-Nazi bullshit, complete with reference, from earlier in this same thread:
? Reply #18 on: November 28, 2007, 11:12:06 AM ?
Reply with quote
>>Of course the region was a deserted wasteland until the Zionists came. No one really lived there... (sarcasm alert)<<
Close, but not quite. The land was legally acquired by Jews who immigrated to the region.
By 1937 there were already 400,000 Jews living there on land they legally purchased... (Reality Alert)
-
<<Let's even pretend that your selected distortion of facts is so, the mindset I was referencing "The obvious answer is to kick the Jews out of the West Bank and let the Arabs who live there have it." is precisely the kind of mindset that will PREVENT any form of peaceful resolution, regardless how hard the Isreali & Palestinian children work>>
Gee, that's really too bad.
Yea, it is. All that hope Miss Henny & I would prefer, has no chance with the Tee & Hamas like-minded minions hell bent on simply kicking Israel out.
Good luck with that, by the way
-
<<All that hope Miss Henny & I would prefer, has no chance with the Tee & Hamas like-minded minions hell bent on simply kicking Israel out.>>
sirs, they've occupied the West Bank for forty years now. And in flagrant violation of international law they have settled 270,000 Jews on it in that time. The settlements continued with no letup during all the "peace" negotiations that have occurred, none of which have come to fruition. Now the Jews are claiming that "facts on the ground" (i.e. the results of their illegal settlements) will have to be taken into account in any future settlement of the borders. The Jews have flagrantly violated even the peace agreements of Oslo and Camp David and in fact a Jewish extremist assassinated the Israeli Prime Minister responsible for the Oslo accords. The bad faith of the Israelis in failing to implement the Oslo accords is transparent. They never complied with a single deadline for territorial handovers, imposed new conditions (such as the infamous demand that "incitement" [never even mentioned in the agreement itself as a precondition to any territorial withdrawal] must stop before any scheduled withdrawal could occur and further attempted to renegotiate the area of each scheduled withdrawal before intiating it.
The "children's groups" are a nice publicity ploy for the Zio-Nazis (they're just full of brilliant PR ideas) but the reality is that such groups are irrelevant and that violence will be the likeliest decider.
-
Despite your revisionist reiterpretation of "occupation", the point still remains. Yours and Hamas have no intentions of doing anything short of simply trying to drive Israel out. As I said, good luck with that
And isn't it nice Miss Henny, how you're now a part of the Zio-Nazi cult, despite all your Israeli protestations & condemnations
-
<<Despite your revisionist reiterpretation of "occupation", the point still remains. Yours and Hamas have no intentions of doing anything short of simply trying to drive Israel out.>>
That's also a half-truth. Like almost everything else you post that isn't an outright lie. The other half of your half-truth is that Hamas has seen the Jews take Arab negotiators for a ride more times than it cares to remember. Has seen a blatant course of bad-faith negotiations repeatedly, has seen Israel violate every obligation it incurred under whatever agreements were negotiated and as a result of seeing every Arab negotiating team getting openly screwed time after time after time, has understandably given up on negotiations with the Jews. At least publicly.
<< As I said, good luck with that>>
Childish. But at about expected level.
<<And isn't it nice Miss Henny, how you're now a part of the Zio-Nazi cult, despite all your Israeli protestations & condemnations>>
I think Henny realizes that I have never called her a Zio-Nazi. But your efforts to stir the pot are duly noted. You must have studied under the great Rich, a Zio-Nazi of prodigious energy and persistence.
-
<<Despite your revisionist reiterpretation of "occupation", the point still remains. Yours and Hamas have no intentions of doing anything short of simply trying to drive Israel out.>>
The other half of your half-truth is that Hamas has seen the Jews take Arab negotiators for a ride more times than it cares to remember.
Ahhh, you must be referring to the asanine notion of giving up land for a "promise of peace", where every time land was given up by Israel, terrorist attacks continued, just closer to Israel.
Has seen a blatant course of bad-faith negotiations repeatedly, has seen Israel violate every obligation it incurred under whatever agreements were negotiated and as a result of seeing every Arab negotiating team getting openly screwed time after time after time, has understandably given up on negotiations with the Jews. At least publicly.
Thank you for reinforcing the point I already made. There is no peaceful resolution, there's only "The obvious answer is to kick the Jews out of the West Bank and let the Arabs who live there have it."
<< As I said, good luck with that>>
Childish. But at about expected level.
Again "The obvious answer is to kick the Jews out of the West Bank and let the Arabs who live there have it." YOUR words, not mine. If you're referring to yourself a s child, ranting to get what you want, then ok, I'll go along with that
<<And isn't it nice Miss Henny, how you're now a part of the Zio-Nazi cult, despite all your Israeli protestations & condemnations>>
I think Henny realizes that I have never called her a Zio-Nazi. But your efforts to stir the pot are duly noted. You must have studied under the great Rich, a Zio-Nazi of prodigious energy and persistence.
Funny, how YOUR words paint her as precisely such "The "children's groups" are a nice publicity ploy for the Zio-Nazis (they're just full of brilliant PR ideas" SHE's the one that introduced the concept of the children trying to work together. YOU'RE the one that just blasted the notion of simply appeasing your new irrelevent term, Zio-nazis. I'm sure she'll be enthralled
-
<<Ahhh, you must be referring to the asanine notion of giving up land for a "promise of peace", where every time land was given up by Israel, terrorist attacks continued, just closer to Israel. >>
What's truly asinine is the idea that by terminating an illegal occupation and allowing the residents of the land to live their lives freely and not under the gun, Israel would be "giving up" land for anything. You can't "give up" that to which you have no right in the first place. A thief can't "give up" what he's stolen and a home invader who terrorizes the homeowner with guns and knives is not "giving up" anything when he leaves or is kicked out.
<<Funny, how YOUR words paint her [Henny] as precisely such [a Zio-Nazi.] "The "children's groups" are a nice publicity ploy for the Zio-Nazis (they're just full of brilliant PR ideas" SHE's the one that introduced the concept of the children trying to work together. YOU'RE the one that just blasted the notion of simply appeasing your new irrelevent term, Zio-nazis. I'm sure she'll be enthralled>>
I'm sure Henny can speak for herself as to how "enthralled" or otherwise she is, but the fact of the matter is that the Zio-Nazis publicize groups like the Children's Camp for Peace" to burnish their own false image of peacefulness and tolerance with the objective of fooling as many Americans as they can. Many well-meaning Americans see these shenanigans and are thereby lured into a false sense of optimism and even begin to question the obvious inferences that they have drawn from Israeli actions and deeds. This of course does not mean that such people are Zio-Nazis. They are the target audience of the Zio-Nazis.
-
the fact of the matter is that the Zio-Nazis publicize groups like the Children's Camp for Peace" to burnish their own false image of peacefulness and tolerance with the objective of fooling as many Americans as they can. Many well-meaning Americans see these shenanigans and are thereby lured into a false sense of optimism and even begin to question the obvious inferences that they have drawn from Israeli actions and deeds. This of course does not mean that such people are Zio-Nazis. They are the target audience of the Zio-Nazis.
As I said, I'm sure Miss Henny will be pleased with your portrayal of her apparent ignorance & niavete. She simply needs to adopt the Tee/Hamas "Kick Israel out of X" approach
-
>>YOU aren't even reading your own posts. <<
Oh my. I inserted the wrong date. That means my entire argument is invalid.
::)
You must really be desperate.
lol
-
<<Oh my. I inserted the wrong date. That means my entire argument is invalid.
<< Roll Eyes>>
That's only half the reason, that you "inadvertently" inserted the wrong date. The other half of the reason why your entire argument is just total bullshit is the date you "inadvertently" left out. The British census of 1922, showing the Jewish population of Palestine to be barely 10% of the whole Palestinian population. As I pointed out in the earlier part of this thread, 400,000 in 1937 meant that the Jewish population of Palestine had almost quintupled in a fifteen-year period of time roughly corresponding to the Nazis' rise to power. (The U.S. population over roughly the same time period increased by a factor of 1.2 or 1.3, by way of comparison.)
<<You must really be desperate.>>
On the contrary, my friend, I think it is you Zio-Nazis who must be really desperate. You have no real case to make, so you try to build one on half-truths (like "by 1937, there were 400,000 Jews in Palestine.") On the theory that bullshit baffles brains. But in fact bullshit doesn't baffle brains. Most people with brains are too busy to waste time arguing with liars and bullshit artists, so the artfully crafted lies of the Zio-Nazis sail through largely unchallenged.
However, the problem with basing an argument on bullshit and half-truths is that sometimes it rubs up against someone who knows the truth and is only too pleased to spare the time to debunk the Zio-Nazi bullshit which you and other Zio-Nazi BS artists like you have used to bamboozle the American people for way too long. Then when the true significance of the facts that you left out of your argument hooks up with the carefully selected facts that you put into your argument, the truth sneaks up behind you and bites you on the ass. Owwwww! YIKES!! truth hurts, eh?
<<lol>>
Yes, Rich, my sentiments exactly. LOL.
-
>>The other half of the reason why your entire argument is just total bullshit is the date you "inadvertently" left out. (big load of crap snipped)<<
You know the amount of bullshit you spew doesn't help your cause. More or less it's still bullshit. You're palestine position hase been proven wrong over and over. See if you have it in you to admit it and move on.
-
OK, Rich, what are you trying to tell me?
<<You know the amount of bullshit you spew doesn't help your cause.>>
OK, you are inferring that I "spew" bullshit. Moreover, that it "doesn't help" my "cause." And further that I somehow know this.
Your point has been noted. More accurately, your complete lack of any point has been noted. Basically, you have been reduced to calling my post "bullshit" without bothering to even justify your calling it bullshit.
<< More or less it's still bullshit. >>
OK. I get it. You still (one whole sentence later) think that what I have to say is bullshit.
<<You're palestine position hase been proven wrong over and over. >>
Of course, this is a complete lie not even worthy of comment. Nobody has ever proven it wrong to me, or to the Palestinians, or to the Arabs or Muslims in general. Nor has it been proven wrong to the UN, which has passed Resolution 242 expressly requiring the Jews to end their illegal occupation. And approximately 60 similar resolutions as wel.
<<See if you have it in you to admit it and move on.>>
OK, I'm trying to get a handle on this one. My position is wrong because (1) you call it bullshit, (2) it's still bullshit and (3) it's been "proven wrong" over and over (although not, apparently, in the Arab world, the Muslim world, the West Bank, the General Assembly of the United Nations and the Security Council of the United Nations.) THEREFORE, in the face of such underwhelming logic, I should admit I'm wrong and move on. [sound of Michael Tee pondering hard for about three nanoseconds]
Sorry, Rich. No can do. Why don't YOU admit for once how wrong-headed and full of shit you and your Zionazi brothers must be? Everyone knows that by now anyway. Their time is up, Rich. The curtain is finally coming down on them and it's been long, long overdue.
-
I feel a quibble comeing on.
maybe two
1) Lets not appropriate our members as game tokens . Henney is able to state her own mind and it would be good to limit our suppositons reguarding her opinions before she makes her own input. When she is clever , correct or cogent she should be congradulated not assimilated.
2)The stakes are small for us , we may be discussing life , death , prosperity and famine but this is not our own lives we are speaking of , we can afford to be less personal and more calm and attempt to be rational. To the more direct participants who are in desprate straights or blinding fear I see good excuse for high emotion, but here we serve ourselves and them better by remaining detached enough to treat each other decently and argue with the best facts we can find and the cleanest logic we can produce. At this remove from the danger , what excuse do we have ?
-
Makes sense to me, plane.
-
Over breakfast, I thought a little more about plane's point that we're removed from the direct danger of the Middle East and can therefore afford to take a more detached view.
We're not removed from the societies we live in, though, and we're all going to pay the price if Zionist hate-mongers succeed in vilifying and demonizing Arabs and Muslims in general. It might serve their political interests very well, but it sure as hell does not serve mine. Here in Toronto, we live in a multi-racial and multi-cultural society of immigrants, where the majority of our high school students, for example, were born outside of Canada. Canadians in general and Torontonians in particular are very proud of our multiculturalism at least on the social level (politically, and even culturally, I think it's been taken way to far in down-grading the essentially British character that this city used to have) but we're proud of how well we all get along, eating at one another's restaurants and celebrating together at weddings, baby christenings, bar mitzvahs, etc. We do business together and address common problems together. In one notable instance where a new mosque was being erected next to an existing synagogue, the synagogue shared its space and hosted the Muslim congregation till the mosque was completed.
All of this could be jeopardized by hate-mongering of the type we have seen in this forum. It's true that this is occasionally accompanied by token expressions of tolerance for "moderate" Muslims, but most of the time the bile is unmoderated by even the token nod to the "moderate" Muslims, whoever and wherever they may be. I see no difference between this bigotry and the white supremacist variety where the guy rails against the "lazy," "shiftless," "thieving," "animalistic" blacks and then goes on to say he's got nothing against those that do their jobs, washing cars or cooking in restaurants, and then go home and look after their children. When racism and bigotry are expressed in general terms and then qualified by some kind of nod to the law-abiding or "moderates" among the group, it's nevertheless racism and bigotry and perceived as such in the target group.
So while I can appreciate and endorse plane's call for civility, I do want to object to the idea that we are (or even should be) "detached" from the issues discussed. Nobody can be detached from issues of the incitement of racial or religious hatred. It affects all of us directly, because all of us exist in a very mixed society.
-
>>OK, you are inferring that I "spew" bullshit. Moreover, that it "doesn't help" my "cause."<<
Correct. You have an annoying tendency to write for the sake of writing. Your point isn't made by the amount of words you write. You're still wrong, and have been proven so, yet you go on and on and on.
The "Palestinians" have no right to land that was NEVER theres. Those who want to live in peace do so. Those who want to murder women and children should be given no quarter. They should be given that choice. No more bending over backward to accommodate these animals. Do what the Jordanians did to them. It's the only thing they understand. They teach their children to hate. They use them as pawns to further their dream of genocide. People like that are less than human and should be met with greater force because they will not stop until they are all dead. They live in a culture of death which Arabs created and Arabs perpetuate so that they will committ these atrocities and Arabs can deny them.
You're nothing but a useful idiot Mikey. You are no better than those who strap the bombs on their own children and send them out to committ genocide.
-
<<You're still wrong, and have been proven so, yet you go on and on and on.>>
So far, nobody's proven me wrong. Which would be quite a trick, because I am right. The Zio-Nazis have quite an elaborate defence team, but when the truth breaks through, it breaks through.
<<The "Palestinians" have no right to land that was NEVER theres. >>
I see. Thank you for the POV of the Zio-Nazi racists and fascists. Here's the actual statement of the Palestinians' rights according to the Charter of the UN, which even Zio-Nazi puppets like Bush and John Bolton have not been able to take the U.S.A. out of as yet:
<<Article 73
<<Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:
<<a. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;
<<b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement; . . . >>
<<Those who want to live in peace do so. Those who want to murder women and children should be given no quarter.>>
Here's how they "live in peace" under the Zio-Nazis. "Israeli Settlers Attack Palestinian Schoolgirls With Axes" - http://thehollytree.blogspot.com/2007/11/israeli-settlers-attack-palestinian.html
There are lots of articles showing how much "peace" the racist Zio-Nazi "settlers" are prepared to provide the Palestinians in the West Bank. Unfortunately only a handful ever break through the stranglehold that the Zionists have on the U.S. MSM. The Europeans are slightly more fortunate in what they are permitted to see in their MSM, so their attitude towards the conflict is somewhat different from Amerikkka's.
<<They should be given that choice. No more bending over backward to accommodate these animals. Do what the Jordanians did to them. It's the only thing they understand. They teach their children to hate. They use them as pawns to further their dream of genocide. People like that are less than human and should be met with greater force because they will not stop until they are all dead. They live in a culture of death which Arabs created and Arabs perpetuate so that they will committ these atrocities and Arabs can deny them.>>
I guess it's only natural when you defend the crimes of the Zio-Nazis that you have to resort to lies and slander. The truth is the last thing you want to see. Well done, Rich - - the blizzard of lies, bullshit and hysteria is about the best you can do in the circumstances, when the truth really can't be held back any longer.
<<You're nothing but a useful idiot Mikey. You are no better than those who strap the bombs on their own children and send them out to committ genocide.>>
I don't claim to be any better than ANY of the combatants, Rich. Not better than the bulldozer operator who flattened Rachael Corrie, not better than the Jews who murdered Mohammed al Doura, killed the ambulance driver who tried to rescue him and seriously wounded the 12-year-old's father as well. Not better than the IDF soldiers who sealed off the unarmed refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila and then allowed in armed Lebanese Christian Fascist militia to massacre thousands of unarmed women and children. Not better than the F-16 pilots who killed dozens of Lebanese schoolchildren in airstrikes last summer. And not better than the suicide bombers who strap on explosive belts to retaliate against the Jews who kill their mothers, fathers, siblings and children and steal the land they live on right out from under them.
You OTOH, Rich, you are lower than any of them. You sit safely in Amerikkka and pour fuel on the flames. You try to incite racial and religious hatred against the "animals" (your word, not mine) whose sole crime is to live on land that the Zio-Nazis want as their own and against any Arab or Muslim who supports them. Your vicious diatribes, if taken seriously by sane and normal Canadians or Americans, which thank God they are not, would spread racial and religious hatred in the very heart of the communities in which we ourselves live and tear apart the fabric of our own civilization and the tolerance and mutual respect on which they were built. In order to satisfy the insane greed for land of your co-religionists in Israel, you are willing to inflict irreparable harm on the cities and communities of North America and to bring upon them a wave of racial and religious hatred never before known here. Well, you and your kind are not going to succeed, Rich. Get used to it.
-
>>So far, nobody's proven me wrong.<<
I'm sure that in your strange little world that's true however, in this little slice of the real world, you have been proven unequivocally, absolutely wrong. But feel free to keep on stammering along. It only makes you look more detached from reality that previously thought.
-
So while I can appreciate and endorse plane's call for civility, I do want to object to the idea that we are (or even should be) "detached" from the issues discussed. Nobody can be detached from issues of the incitement of racial or religious hatred. It affects all of us directly, because all of us exist in a very mixed society.
You make a good point.
I should not say that we should not care.
Everyone involved is a human being and their misery deserves some sympathy .
Even for the ones at fault , whoever you think they are .
Europe fought an hundred years over the impossibility of Christondom being devided between Prodestants and Catholics , the war wound down finally with Europe still devided about in half between Prodestants and Catholics , but with much less willingness to make war over the issue.
Arabs and Jews have fought about sixty years now over the impossibility of Jeruslem being devided between Jews and Muslims .
Just fourty years to go!
-
<<I'm sure that in your strange little world that's true however, in this little slice of the real world, you have been proven unequivocally, absolutely wrong. But feel free to keep on stammering along. It only makes you look more detached from reality that previously thought.>>
No, Rich, I was speaking of the real world when I said I was not proven wrong. I usually am speaking of the real world unlike some in this forum. YOU on the contrary, have been proven wrong more times than I care to remember. More times than YOU care to remember, judging from the contents of your posts.
-
<<I'm sure that in your strange little world that's true however, in this little slice of the real world, you have been proven unequivocally, absolutely wrong. But feel free to keep on stammering along. It only makes you look more detached from reality that previously thought.>>
No, Rich, I was speaking of the real world when I said I was not proven wrong.
LOL....only in Tee's happy alternate reality does his reality show that he has yet to be proven wrong
-
<<LOL....only in Tee's happy alternate reality does his reality show that he has yet to be proven wrong>>
Well, to rephrase that -- making it real simple for you and Rich to understand - - never in this forum have you or Rich proven me to be wrong on anything other than the odd minor point. (The one that comes to mind is that although there were provinces of world empires named Palestine, there was never a separate independent country with that name. BFD - - real relevance to any of the issue in this forum: zilch.)
-
<<LOL....only in Tee's happy alternate reality does his reality show that he has yet to be proven wrong>>
Well, to rephrase that -- making it real simple for you and Rich to understand - - never in this forum have you or Rich proven me to be wrong on anything other than the odd minor point.
Outside of course the garbage about Bush lying us into war, that the intel was fabricated, that the election was stolen, that we were trying to impose our predetermined ruler of Iraq, that we have our own U.S run torture chambers, etc. Major relevent points, like those. The fact you can't bring yourself to acknowledge those truths, is far beyond anyone else's control, and limited to your alternate reality where again, you have yet to be proven wrong
-
<<Outside of course the garbage about Bush lying us into war, that the intel was fabricated, that the election was stolen, that we were trying to impose our predetermined ruler of Iraq . . . Major relevent points, like those. The fact you can't bring yourself to acknowledge those truths, is far beyond anyone else's control, and limited to your alternate reality where again, you have yet to be proven wrong>>
Quite frankly, I have not been proven wrong on any of the above. Those are correct statements of the facts. A majority of Americans polled now believes that Bush lied. The intel was fabricated and/or cherry-picked. Either way, it was made to fit into Bush's decision, already taken, to invade Iraq without any valid reason. Ahmad Chalabi was hand-picked to rule Iraq for Amerikkka but Amerikkka found it couldn't force him down the throats of its puppet government, which is a real sign of incompetence. The elections were stolen.
<< . . . that we have our own U.S run torture chambers, etc.>>
I'm sure you do and that the evidence will eventually surface. Regardless, you do ship prisoners to be tortured in foreign prisons, so it's really irrelevant whether you run them or not, the violation of human rights is already established when you ship the guy out for torture. The U.S. is now one of the world's major violator of human rights.
Your characterization of these simple truths, some already acknowledged by a majority of Americans, as "alternate reality" is just another indication of how far out of touch YOU are with the real world.
-
While the Ottoman Turk government controlled the region the population was sparce and the borders were unimportant.
Deals were made for the sake of peace that ensured holysites would be accessable.
Jews , Christians and Muslims mingled.
Is it to late to give it back ?
-
<<Is it to late to give it back ?>>
I go on the theory that it's never too late to right a wrong, but there's no doubt in my mind that it would have been a lot easier twenty or thirty years ago and that each year that passed built new hatred. The COST of giving back will be a lot greater now than it would have been then, but by the same token the cost of giving back will be higher ten years from now than it is now.
I think, in terms of undying hatred based on the general situation, the cost plateaued a long time ago. At this point the only increases in hatred will come from anyone not previously affected who loses a loved one. Anyone who gives a shit on general principles has already hardened his heart long ago. That will take a lot of work to undo. In many cases an impossible task.
-
<<Outside of course the garbage about Bush lying us into war, that the intel was fabricated, that the election was stolen, that we were trying to impose our predetermined ruler of Iraq . . . Major relevent points, like those. The fact you can't bring yourself to acknowledge those truths, is far beyond anyone else's control, and limited to your alternate reality where again, you have yet to be proven wrong>>
Quite frankly, I have not been proven wrong on any of the above.
As has already been referenced, the fact that you can't see past the FACTS that completely debunk your mentality of how you supposedly "haven't been proven wrong on any of the above", is yours, and your alone. Not even professional help is likely to provide you with any shred of objective analysis ability
-
<<As has already been referenced, the fact that you can't see past the FACTS that completely debunk your mentality of how you supposedly "haven't been proven wrong on any of the above", is yours, and your alone. Not even professional help is likely to provide you with any shred of objective analysis ability>>
LOL. What I provided you WAS an objective analysis, but you are so blinded by your moronic "We're No. 1" bullshit, which you actually believe, that you can never accept an objective analysis that puts your country in its true perspective. Which is why con artists and master manipulators like Bush and his handlers will always be able to run rings around you, playing up to your "patriotic" blindspot and running your country into the ground to your mindless cheering.
-
<<As has already been referenced, the fact that you can't see past the FACTS that completely debunk your mentality of how you supposedly "haven't been proven wrong on any of the above", is yours, and your alone. Not even professional help is likely to provide you with any shred of objective analysis ability>>
LOL. What I provided you WAS an objective analysis, but...
LOL.....BUT, that it wasn't. You've tossed all aspects of objectivity away to desperatly hold on to your Bush is evil, Amerikka is evil diatribes. But by all means, continue with the comedy routine
-
So, Richiepoo, your belief is that the Palestinians deserve only death. Like the roaches in a Blag Flag commercial, they deserve to die.
-
So, Richiepoo, your belief is that the Palestinians deserve only death. Like the roaches in a Blag Flag commercial, they deserve to die.
When the only tool in your kit is a hammer, all problems look like nails.
-
<<You've tossed all aspects of objectivity away to desperatly hold on to your Bush is evil, Amerikka is evil diatribes. But by all means, continue with the comedy routine>>
It's not comedy, but I'll continue to challenge your lies and BS every chance I get. It's a duty and a pleasure. Bush IS evil. Amerikkka IS evil. Why you would think that's funny is beyond me, but maybe one day you will see that idiotic laughter is not the appropriate response.
-
<<You've tossed all aspects of objectivity away to desperatly hold on to your Bush is evil, Amerikka is evil diatribes. But by all means, continue with the comedy routine>>
It's not comedy, but I'll continue to challenge your lies and BS every chance I get. It's a duty and a pleasure. Bush IS evil. Amerikkka IS evil.
:D .....I rest my case.
-
<<Cheesy .....I rest my case. >>
Might as well. It's too lame a case to argue.
-
:D
-
>>So, Richiepoo, your belief is that the Palestinians deserve only death. Like the roaches in a Blag Flag commercial, they deserve to die.<<
Well BO, I have to admit I have no sympathy for terrorists or their sympathizers. That's one of the reason I find you so distasteful. People who target women and children, or support those who do, deserve nothing less than death.
-
>>When the only tool in your kit is a hammer, all problems look like nails.<<
Poor stain. Are rats of your delusions eating the kernals of your brain again?
(A dollar to the first person who remembers this reference to a yellow stain classic)
:D