Liquor Dealer

So, are you saying they should use cluster bombs?

__________________
Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

geep

I didn't advocate putting them in prison. It's the restaint thats important. Show the world that you're not like them, that innocent lives do matter. In the news reports of todays missle attack the services were all reporting children had been injured by the Israeli rockets. Not very good PR.

4thTimeLucky

LOL! I can just imagine American kids wondering why problems like the Hydra weren't solved with bigger weapons.

Golden Fleece? I love it! That's so bling bling baby!!

__________________
I've been 4thTimeLucky, you've been great. Goodnight and God bless!

popo

Arguing about history s a moot point. We will get nowhere. Neither of us were there but we've both obviously read enough on the subject and have come to different conclusions. We're both big enough to realize that what you read will generally form your conclusions for you.

I've been through enough of these debates to know that this will go on forever here so I hope we can agree to disagree and try and wrap things up. I'll only respond to the points where there's misunderstanding.

Originally posted by debaser
Well, I'm sure the people whos homes were taken and lives ruined feel much better now that you have cleared up that there wasn't a country there to start with...

I'm pretty sure I answered this in my last response.

True, but did not the 6th Zionist conference decide that Argentina would be a perfectly acceptable substitute for Palestine? Also, even if this was the only place they could go (which it wasn't), does that make the Palestinian situation any more tenable?

Now I'm seeing where you're coming from. I'd never heard of an Argentina plan so I did a search for it and could only find it mentioned on sites that were vehemently pro-Palestinian. I wonder why. All of the sites had the same wrong Congress # (they all mention the 4th Congress) and wrong date (they all say 1904) so they all seamingly come from the same misinformation.

There is controversy from the 6th Congress (1903), however. At the time, Great Britain was not willing to go ahead with the plan for a Jewish homeland in Israel so Herzl tried to win their favor by agreeing to a temporary home in what is now Uganda/Kenya so that Jews could have a place to flee persecution. The Zionist Congress first approved then turned down this proposal because there were already many Jews living in what is now Palestine and because of the historical link.


No, Israel was created as a result of the Balfour Declaration, which was a direct result of the Zionist movement. As I stated before, Jews were not settleing the land, they were living in cities when they arrived. I fail to see how the number of people in the area in 1800 has anything to do with the figures I posted above, other than attempt to obfuscate the fact that the Palestinians got screwed.

Jews were not moving to Arab cities, they were creating their own. Tel Aviv (Israel's largest city) was settled in 1906. Jerusalem had more Jews than Arabs since the 1840's.

Haifa has been the one city where both Jews and Arabs have lived integrated and in peace.


And pray tell, what does it say about me?

That you don't know how to share. I realize that it's tough to understand today how there can be land without a country but that's what it was back then. In a area of almost 10 million now, there was fewer than 300k then. There was more than enough room for Jews and Arabs to be happy side by side which was Herzl's stated dream.

Of course it doesn't. We are talking about Israel. TransJordan was already more than 95% arab, so I fail to see why it is even an issue. The 55% figure also didn't include Vietnam, Canada, or Zimbabwe.

Because Transjordan was and is made up of the same Palestinians who were part of the British Mandate. They got Jordan and they got 45% of the land west of the river. The border was even drawn up so that Arabs made up the majority within Palestine and Jews made up the majority within Israel.


Nope. Palestinians are the fastest growing population segment in Israel. They will outnumber Jews by the year 2020.

Again. I know the study that you're referring to but it INCLUDES the Palestinians in the West Bank & Gaza. The study is faulty because it's silly to include them as part of Israel's population. It will never happen.

Now, say whatever you want about me but I'm not going to keep going tit for tat in discussing history.

Fact is, Israel is there. The Palestinians are there. Fuck the people on both sides who claim that Jews don't belong there and that Palestinians don't deserve a state.

debaser

I agree with you 100% on this, at the very least.

__________________

gibber71

Very well put and agree totally.Good one on you popo.

I get so sick and tired of people,especially opinion writer's in the media who feel it necessary to spin,change and omit the facts simply to cater to those who only want to see,hear and believe all the subjective bullshit that surrounds this very serious issue.

I'm not interested in anyones revisionist history,I'm interested in solutions.It takes much more intelligence to objectively quantify the issues than it does to try and divide people or force them to take sides.

I don't care who started what in whatever century and who retaliated first.It's time for the Isreali's and Palestinian's to grow up and be productive human beings.I was about to say and stop acting like children,but then again even children are not so fucking full of themselves.When the adults choose to be role models and mentors to their children rather than acting as if the sun shines exclusively for them,peace may have a chance.Until then,it won't.

Sun Tzu

I have to third this statement. This is better put than any of the debates I've been involved with on this issue in the forum. The occasionly aggitating element is when this philosophy is ignored.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

opentocomments

i say take the land from all of them and destroy it

There is nothing there no oil no major mineral diposites so move every one out and blow it to hell

They only want it for relgion. Neither Religion advocates murder or war in any kind unless it is needed to protect the rights given by god.

So why does a war start about religion i mean WTF.

__________________
How do we know that the sky is not green and we are all color-blind?

crumbbum

I would also agree with popo's statement, in theory- I just don't see how, despite all the talk about it, how it is actually possible to make 2 sovereign countries west of the Jordan. I think people forget that we are talking about a very small place. Also, the "west bank"(in quotations because it only aquired that name when Jordan illegally occupied it- the west bank of the Jordan river) is the high ground. Whoever controls the hilltops can shell the galilee. If there is a palestinian state there, a 23rd arab state, who will make sure it isn't a terror state? Will they be allowed an army? What if the arabs try to attack Israel again, and "Palestine" opens its borders to them? Who will control the airspace? The resources?

Basically, I think this was best summarized in an article I read by Daniel Pipes, written in the early 90s, I don't see how it is in any way possible to create this new state built on 50+ years of hatred and terrorism against civilians, without just creating a scenario that will inevitably lead to war. If there are 2 states there, it won't work, and there will be a war that destroys one or the other. Since that could possible be a nuclear war, in the worst case scenario, and since the 2 state idea is in actual, on the ground reality really unrealistic, I do not support a Palestinian state west of the Jordan.

Since it was the Palestinians who walked away from the peace talks, and who have overwhelmingly supported truly sickening terrorism against innocent people, I think that it is their side that should pack up and leave. Israel is less than 1% of the landmass in the middle east. The arab world is not only humongous, but in many places very underpopulated. The world should set up a palestinian state somewhere else, where both parties then will be able to live in peace, without the risk and overwhelming likelihood of all out war. Also, the reason the Palestinians hate Israel so much is mostly jealousy- watching the Jews come and build a 1st world country in 20 years, when in the arab countries there is no economic infrastructure except for oil, which keeps the autocratic governments riding high on the hog while the normal people are barely able to feed their families. Giving them their own country will only fan the fire here, since at least they can tell themselves(as they do) that the real reason their society and economy is so backwards is because of their lack of political independence, as opposed to corruption and political manipulation by their leaders (and skimming off the top- Arafat has a personal fortune of over $300 Million).

I also think it is rewarding terrorism, and an undermining of the war on terror that we are supposedly serious about to give them a state of the past 2-3 years of unrelenting murder of Israeli civilians. Now don't get me started, this is not to say that the Palestinians don't suffer either, but their suffering is a direct result of the terrorism.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Lebell

Religion isn't the cause, it's the excuse.

The atheist dictatorships of the 20th century proved that you need no religion to be brutal to your fellow human.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Sun Tzu

This train of thought reminds me of another group of people from the past I just cant put my finger on it.

When you say walked away from "peace talks" do you mean Camp David?

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

crumbbum

Camp David 2 and Taba. I have heard the arguments about how the offer at camp david wasn't enough- this is irrelevant though. The whole point of NEGOTIATION is that a concensus is reached. If Arafat hadn't walked away, they could have gotten more out of the talks. And of course, the offer at Taba gave him no legitimate excuse for walking away, it was more that they had ever been offered or ever will be offered again. Frankly, I think it was insane of Barak to offer so much while Israel was under attack by terrorists. No wonder they are still attacking. In the past, brutal terrorist attacks have only gotten them greater concessions, as they still are today. If we can agree that the wanton slaughter of innocent civilians is wrong and evil, then it certainly follows that no matter what the cause, such methods should never be rewarded, thus granting them legitimacy, and also ensuring that they will continue to be used, and observed to be succesful against the west.

When a cause is obviously just, there is no need to hijack airplanes and kill as many innocent people as possible in order to grab headlines and "publicize the cause". That something needs to be done is self evident. There is no "if, then" equation that leads to such barbarity. It is a tactical choice. The tibetan buddhists were brutally expelled by the Chinese, thousands murdered, their monasteries burned, etc. They never became terrorists- their plight has gained the sympathy of the world. China, which is a huge world power, has not budged yet.
The Palestinians can't claim anywhere near such persecution. They lost their homes in a war that the arabs started, so really the responsibility for their refugee status is with the Arab countries that started the war. The world seems to forget this- I wonder how much oil has to do with it.

In the case of the Palestinians, Israel has actually been trying to improve their lives for a long time. When Israel proposed building the palestinians in refugee camps more comfortable, better living accomodations, the PLO refused. Why? The PLO makes them suffer on purpose, in order to blame Israel and generate greater world sympathy. It is a sick game being played with people's lives.

The reason this "peace plan" is doomed to fail is because it isn't dealing with the reality of the situation. The Palestinian goal is not statehood for it's own sake, in order to live and be free and go on with life. In fact it is considered a stepping stone on the way to the liberation of all of "palestine", the destruction of Israel. Any careful scrutiny of the statements by PA leadership reveals this. You should read what kinds of things Arafat said to his own people in Arabic, at the same time he was talking peace to the west. And now everyone is excited over Abbas, but not only is he powerless, he simply wants to end the terrorism as a tactical decision- believing that a temporary stop to violence will gain greater concessions and weaken Israel more. He is a PLO old-timer, and his goal is also the destruction of the state of Israel. Until both parties actually want PEACE, it is useless to proceed with peace plans that assume this. Israel wants peace becasue it doesn't have a choice- it is surrounded by enemies on all sides.

Another misconception is that the Israeli-Palestinian war somehow happens in a vacuum- in reality it is part of the greater Arab-Israeli conflict. It is actually a proxy war. Weapons are smuggled in from Egypt. Saudi Arabia funds Hamas, Iran, like it is behind Hezbollah, is also behind other terror groups. They also supply explosives and weapons. Iraq was a big player until recently. Basically, after the Arabs lost 3 wars that were attempts to wipe Israel off the map, they instead changed tactics- by supporting terrorism, and by throwing their weight politically to use "salami tactics" against Israel.

It's funny, one of the unique things about Israel is that it has the freest arab press in the entire middle east. The arab countries have a lot to learn from their only modern and democratic neighbor, and a lot to gain economically. Maybe this is what they are afraid of.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

Group of people from the past you can't quite think of? What exactly do you mean, Sun-tzu? I'd appreciate it if the discussion could stay focused on the issues. I can only assume the worst from your comments, and would prefer to be debated, rather than insulted. Thank you in advance.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Sun Tzu

Toltec way of a simpler life:
1. Always do your best
2. Treat your word, honor, and integrity as valuable as life itself
3. Dont take anything personally
4. Never assume what someone else is thinking

I cant remember the name or I would have stated it. Outside of observing the horrible deaths that everyones aware of the rest of what you stated reminds of the mindset of a political party whos name evades me at the moment. I see no insult in my statement.

Were you refering to Camp David in reference to the Palestinians (or we can call them Arabs if you prefer since you dont believe they exsist)

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Sun Tzu

<FONT COLOR=”red”>I would also agree with popo's statement, in theory- I just don't see how, despite all the talk about it, how it is actually possible to make 2 sovereign countries west of the Jordan.
</FONT COLOR>

This was a little unclear in you categorizing popo’s statement as workable in theory and then go on to offer yours in contrast. The contrast I concluded was of course my own interpretation of what you are saying, but I know what you are saying; its the only reason I posted again in this thread. I don’t understand why you would put what popo stated into that context and then go on to say what you did. Is that your version of a workable theory?



<FONT COLOR=”red”>Since it was the Palestinians who walked away from the peace talks, and who have overwhelmingly supported truly sickening terrorism against innocent people, I think that it is their side that should pack up and leave. </FONT COLOR>

I’ll debate this all night, but judging from what you said it would be useless.




<FONT COLOR=”red”>
Israel is less than 1% of the landmass in the middle east. The arab world is not only humongous, but in many places very underpopulated. The world should set up a palestinian state somewhere else, where both parties then will be able to live in peace, without the risk and overwhelming likelihood of all out war. Also, the reason the Palestinians hate Israel so much is mostly jealousy- watching the Jews come and build a 1st world country in 20 years, when in the arab countries there is no economic infrastructure except for oil, which keeps the autocratic governments riding high on the hog while the normal people are barely able to feed their families. Giving them their own country will only fan the fire here, since at least they can tell themselves(as they do) that the real reason their society and economy is so backwards is because of their lack of political independence, as opposed to corruption and political manipulation by their leaders (and skimming off the top- Arafat has a personal fortune of over $300 Million). </FONT COLOR>

The first part of this is rationalization that I see as being so ________ _______ ______
I’m at a loss for words and frankly as intelligent as you sound I don’t know why you would even go there.

The second part. . . . . ./takes a deep breath. . . . .

Backwards economy huh? I would tell you the figure, but perhaps when you have a moment you could find these numbers (it may sink in a little more, but perhaps not)
1. How much the US has given Israel in total?
2. How much the US gave Israel last year?
3. How much the US gives to Israel per day?
4. Interest to Israel from Advanced Payments?
5. Interest Costs Borne by U.S.?
6. Total Cost to U.S. Taxpayers?
7. How much more Sharon is requesting this year on top the aid already given?

Backwards economy? You mention Arafat’s corruption, yet you don’t mention Sharon almost getting thrown out by his own Israeli citizens for being corrupt. I’m sure you remember when they cut him off on TV. I don’t see this as being “some fringe Israelis”





I asked you before if you considered yourself a Zionist, you stated you support the Zionist movement, but are not one yourself. Why not?

Can we once again trade websites? Could you please provide a website you feel is a good representation of Zionist philosophy?

Even though you probably see this a fringe Jewish site I still think its worth a moment of your time, and maybe a little more. http://www.fmep.org/

I don’t have a clear thought of what should take place if Hamas sees the entire area as Palestine; Israel should have the right to exist. I also see uprooting an indigenous population out of its homeland with force to be an act of conquest. Conquest is not innocent and has never been without a price as hardly anything in this world is.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

popo

I just wanted to point out 2 things here:

1) One of the PLO's basic tenets was the 1974 (Palestine National Council) acceptance of a Plan of Phases. In it, they realized that all of Israel could not be overtaken at once. Instead, they would agree to incremental peace deals that would give them enough land from which to fight the final battle. I wish I were making this up but this is a reason that many Jews simply will never ever trust Arafat or even someone like Abbas. How do they know if the peace is sincere or not?

IMO, there is no choice but to hope that the kids & grandkids will forget the original cause but many Israelis see this as suicide.

2) Green is very difficult to read on this board.

Sun Tzu

I used red for the code I dont know why it came out green. Thanks for the input.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Liquor Dealer

I appreciate the green. I am colorblind and usually don't see the red at all - the green jumps out at me. I don't know how many people are colorblind on the boards - we had this hashed out once before on Jadz word of the day. Anyway - no matter what you do someone is gonna' complain I guess.

__________________
Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

seretogis

I thought that we had banned those weirdo colorblind freaks from this board?!

(just kidding omg!)

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

crumbbum

I looked at the website, and from the links I saw on the main page it apparently blames Israel for the fact that Palestinian terrorists kill it's civilians. Posting these things isn't constructive, since it IS a fringe viewpoint- not only doesn't it speak for the vast majority of Israelis, but it's understanding of the conflict is not shared by the US, any of our congressman, or basically anyone who knows what they are talking about either.

About aid to Israel- Israel getting a lot of aid has nothing to do with corruption in the Palestinian authority. They are separate issues, so don't dodge the first. Why does Israel get so much aid? One, they are constantly under terrorist attack, which devastates the economy. Two, many of Israel's neighbors and enemies have billions in oil money. The US, wanting Israel to exist since we derive great benefit from this, gives the aid to keep Israel strong, to keep a balance. It is also for the same reason that the US has turned Egypt into a military juggernaut, second only in the region to Israel. Who else would they attack? This is standard foreign policy- you make a conflict balanced, with both sides dependent on you, then you have maximum influence. This is standard poitical theory.

Also, Israel is the west's front line against terrorism. Israel absorbs all of what would be directed at us if it didn't exist. On top of that, Israel supplies the US with valuable intelligence info, military upgrades, and a lot of economic cooperation. It also gives the US a lot more leverage when dealing with the arab states. Also, the aid is not just forked over- most of it is in loan guarantees. Israel has never defaulted on a loan to the US. There is a big difference between loans and "free money". When it comes to just pure aid, it is just military aid that the US gives, for the reasons stated above. Anyway, this has nothing to do with this thread.

As far as my agreeing with Popo's statement, my point was that if the Palestinians seriously wanted peace, as opposed to the Phased plan that he mentioned, and it was actually feasible for a Palestinian state to exist next to Israel in peace, and if that would truly solve the conflict, then I'd be for it. The fact is that it won't though. Again, there will never be peace until both sides want it. Based on history and recent events, I don't think the Palestinians collectively will seek peace until all dreams of destroying Israel have been extinguished, and until those who foment rejectionism and hatred have been unequivocally defeated. There won't be peace, no matter what the plan, when "collaborators with Israel" are publicly lynched and their bodies hung on lampposts in Bethlehem square. No peace plan will work, since they assume certain premises that must be true for it to succeed. The primary premise is that both sides want peace, to co-exist. Seeing as Israel initiated the Oslo accords a long time ago, and even Sharon has publicly stated that it is not desirable for Israel to maintain military control over the Palestinians.

I don't think it is Israel that has a problem coexisting with Palestinians. I think they have a problem coexisting with the murder of their civilians, and with a palestinian government that sows hatred and is bent on Israel's destruction. The Palestinians were granted autonomy in 1993-4 and it only led to more terror since than in all the years proceeding. I can only imagine what a state, with full rights and independence, would bring while the current reality still exists. Nuclear war comes to mind.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

Oh, and the Palestinians are not indigenous. The ottomans conquered the land 800 years ago. Some arabs moved in, less than half a million in the entire area of Palestine. The only people that could be counted as indigenous would be the Jews, since there has been a small, but unbroken Jewish presence there since the time of the Romans, and of course from before that back to biblical times.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

I don't say this to say that necessarily the Palestinians would have no right to live there, just correcting a fallacy. If the Palestinians could live in peace with Israel, I don't think anyone would have a problem with it. (at least anyone that matters)

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

Kind of weird having 4 posts in a row, the last 2 were afterthoughts, but I stumbled across this earlier and thought it should be posted. It's an excerpt from an article on www.opinionjournal.com, which is basically the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal.

"The White House still cannot bring itself to admit the true nature of the aggression against Israel. It still tends to treat the regional crisis as "a conflict of two people over one land" that can be resolved by the creation of a Palestinian state. According to this view, since Jews and Arabs both lay claim to the same territory of Israel-Palestine, some division of the territory between will bring about a peaceful resolution. This is the assumption behind the "road map" the president presented at the recent meetings in Egypt and Jordan, inviting the Palestinians to halt their terror and Israel to withdraw some of its settlements from the disputed lands.

Unfortunately, the Arab war against Israel is no more a territorial conflict than was al Qaeda's strike against America, and it can no more be resolved by the "road map" than anti-Americanism could be appeased by ceding part of the U.S. to an Islamist enclave. From the moment in 1947 when Jewish leaders accepted and Arab rulers rejected the U.N. partition plan of Palestine, the Arab-Israeli conflict bore no further likeness to more conventional territorial struggles. Arab rulers defied the U.N. charter by denying the legitimacy of a member state. Arab countries refused to acknowledge the existence of a single Jewish land. Arab rulers did not object to Israel because it rendered the Palestinians homeless. Rather, they ensured that the Palestinians should remain homeless so that they could organize their politics around opposition to Israel.

At any point during the past 55 years, Arab governments could have helped the Palestinian Arabs settle down to a decent life. They could have created the infrastructure of an autonomous Palestine on the West Bank of the Jordan and the Gaza territory that Egypt controlled until 1967, or encouraged the resettlement of Palestinians in Jordan, which constitutes the lion's share of the original mandate of Palestine. Rather than fund the Palestine Liberation Organization to foment terror against Israel they could have endowed Palestinian schools of architecture, engineering, medicine and law. What Israel did for its refugees from Arab lands, Arabs could have done much more sumptuously for the Palestinians displaced by the same conflict. Instead, Arab rulers cultivated generations of refugees in order to justify their ongoing campaign against the "usurper."

At this point, I don't think Israel should be pushed for any more concessions to the arabs. Peace could happen tomorrow if only the arabs would accept it (Palestinians included). The ball is in their court (also the Palestinians) to show that they are serious about peace. Let them use their autonomy to make a society based on life instead of death. When it is clearly evident that they actually want peace, then peace will be made. At this time such talk will only keep the dreams of destroying Israel alive (which the Oslo process seems to have resurrected when you look at the terrorism statistics and public opinion polls). There needs to be a fundamental re-evaluation of the nature of this conflict.

And Sun-Tzu, Zionism is the political movement for Jewish statehood. I think very strongly that there should be a Jewish state, and that such a state is probably the most legitimate and necessary state created in history. I think the crusades, pogroms, blood libels, Inquisition, Holocaust, etc. have proven beyond all doubt that Jews need their own country where they can defend themselves. If you don't see this then something is wrong either with your brain or your heart. The reason I didn't say "I'm a Zionist" before is because it isn't something I've been politically involved in, and also I am not Israeli. I am not trying to deceive anyone, if that is what you think.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Sun Tzu

No I didnt accuse you of trying to deceive anyone, I interprete that you believe everything you are saying as being true.

Dont take my lack of reply to the material you are posting as me not wanting to respond, when I observe a direction that states mosts information outside of Zionist philosphy is wrong or inaccurate I have to comprehend that its a waiste of my time to engage.

Thats not a smear campaign crumbbum I have everything you stated from all the posts referencing various government bodies being wrong or inaccurate in the documentation of history. If thats what you believe so be it.

This quote from you basically sums it all up for me:

"What the world thinks isn't good enough- the world has never been kind to the jews, and most world governments have vested political interests(oil) in the middle east."

I'll just have to remember in the future if I read one of your posts and get angry, I'll have to remember what Im dealing with.

Im sure you feel the same about me; I happen to think information coming from Zionist directions are self serving and remind me of a politcal philosophy of the past that is gone now.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Liquor Dealer

I keep hearing the term bling bling used on this board - being as ignorant as I am about such things I sought and found what I presume to be an intelligent conversation of the use of this term:

Because of extreme racist content I did delete some words:

http://www.orbyonline.com/cgi-bin/mt...i?entry_id=501

Dear sirs, none of us actually say 'bling bling' seriously."

SIGN BELOW:

Posted by Dan the Goose at October 9, 2002 01:06 AM
What the hell is this world coming to? I agree that we are in hell. I fucking loath the word bling bling. how fucking gay is that? I mean come on now people? We're letting words that violate the grammar and structure of english infiltrate themselves into our world. Keep shitty words like that in the less intelligent subculture. That is all for now.

Posted by MateoSuave at October 9, 2002 01:08 AM
BLING BLING

Posted by AlexLube at October 9, 2002 10:33 AM
hell yeah alex!

Posted by melinda at October 10, 2002 03:47 PM
At least this way I'll finally learn what bling bling means. Don't forget orgasmatron! We all need to know that word.

Posted by mclass at January 17, 2003 01:22 PM
Though I do believe that the english language has indeed slumped to new levels, I do not think in any way or form that you have the right to say that you should leave the word to lower sub cultures? What the heck is that supposed to mean? I hope you know the only culture I hear use that word is white people! No offense to anyone who may be caucasion, I just think it is horrible and sterotypical for someone to say that!So get your facts straight!

Posted by chanel at February 18, 2003 08:08 PM
What the hizzo!!?!?!? They are adding these hecka fake words to the dictionary? I really hate that... It messes up my mojo, and when my mojo is messed up, I can't get jiggy. Perhaps I should attempt, however, to invent new words so that I can become rich and have some spare bling-bling in my pocket.

Posted by Michael at February 22, 2003 07:36 PM
Y´all DO have the right to say bling-bling is used by lower sub cultures. Take it from my dumbass, Lil´ Wheezy. Peace

Posted by Lil´ Wheezy at March 28, 2003 07:47 AM
On the contrary, white people do not use ¨Bling-bling¨ except to make fun of the dumb n*****s that do!

Posted by Jigga-What at March 28, 2003 07:52 AM
yall aint shit yall aint shit yall aint shit yall aint shit yall aint shit.......I hate that repititious shit and I sure as hell hate the fact that bling bling is going to be taught to my children decreasing their brain size and sending the world back to the age of monkeys. Damn Jesse Jackson! Fighting for all the wrong reasons. Ebonics is the thing that brings us black people down not the white man. Jesse Jackson tells us we can be lazy and stupid and get away with it.

Posted by Dawg at March 28, 2003 05:40 PM
Dude, you sound like a white racist piece of shit to me...just an observation. Black people don't generally refer to themselves as monkeys. In fact, I'm pretty sure they don't appreciate it. And in what way does adding a word to the dictionary make anyone lazy and stupid? Nobody is going to teach that shit to your kids, and with any luck, you won't have any. Get emotional about something important, not this bullshit...

Posted by The Mizzle at May 1, 2003 06:59 PM
I don't accept these "new" words either. They don't help people understand each other. In fact, they are there as a kind of code to exclude non-members.

Posted by Mike V at May 24, 2003 04:19 PM

__________________
Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

crumbbum

Sun Tzu, what are you talking about? I have not delegitimized any facts here. You have repeatedly posted links to sites that represent groups in Israel that represent fringe opinions there. This doesn't make them illegitimate. I am concerned with facts. The fact that a small number of people feel any particular does not prove anything about the nature of the conflict or what can be done to bring peace, and I don't see what your intentions are in posting them. I acknowledge the differing viewpoints on this topic.

If you post facts, we can have a real discussion. My arguments are based on fact, not emotivism. If you can back up what you say, it would add greater weight to your posts. Some sources are not legit. Awhile ago, for example, one source I don't acknowledge would be the British immigration numbers as representative of the real immigration that was going on. This is because much immigration was done under British noses. This is not rejection because it's "not a zionist source"- it is rejection because there is no way that the source is accurate.

The only other source I recall dismissing was the "Independent Palestine Information Network", as I believe it was called, which was referenced for a supposed quote by Sharon about "controlling the Americans". Having never heard of this source, and aware of many lies that have been told by Palestinians propagandists, and also because the only websites I found that used this source were primarily anti-Jewish hate sites, I do not take it as legitimate. I expect sources that can be verified.

Seriously, this response seemed pretty desperate and a little hysterical- I am all for honest discussion and disagreement, but not if your attitude is "Don't confuse me with the facts". We are not discussing me, we are discussing the Arab-Israeli conflict, and I would appreciate it if we could stick to the facts and to legitimate debate, with intellectual honesty and a commitment to the truth. Your comparing me to this mysterious political party (German by any chance?) does nothing to increase understanding in this discussion, and is simply mudslinging. You don't have to participate in the discussion if you don't want to, but that is unacceptable.

What I said before is that if you disagree, which you have a right to obviously, I would hope that you could respond to the facts I've presented and explain why you disagree, or how you would discount claims I've made. If you disagree, you have to demonstrate why and what that position is based on, and you have to be able to explain the things I've posted. The response above is not constructive and has no place in a discussion about an issue as important as this one.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

"This quote from you basically sums it all up for me:

"What the world thinks isn't good enough- the world has never been kind to the jews, and most world governments have vested political interests(oil) in the middle east."

I'll just have to remember in the future if I read one of your posts and get angry, I'll have to remember what Im dealing with."

My point in the above quotation is that in order to truly understand the conflict, a person must think independently and examine the history and facts themselves, since governmental positions tend to be based on politics and economics. Just because world governments say something, doesn't necessarily mean that it is the truth. It also doesn't mean it isn't- my point is that individuals who care about the world we live in need to think independently. For example, I don't hear the UN ever talk about the Kurds, but they have been persecuted in the arab world more than almost anyone, and really deserve their own state as well. Just because the UN doesn't mention them, this doesn't mean it isn't a real issue and a reality. It is likely not mentioned because no one wants to piss off Turkey, and there is nothing politically to gain by supporting the Kurds. Similarly, if world governments in the UN mostly agree on something about the Arab-Israeli conflict, these opinions are shaped by individual political interests. Governments are rarely motivated by idealism.

I could obviously provide many more examples, if you contest this reality. And Sun-Tzu, please articulate just "what you are dealing with" that makes you so upset. Instead of trying to de-legitimize me, why not prove me wrong, if you can. That, I thought, was the point of the message board and of the exchange. If you can't, then if you're intellectually honest concede, and if you are unwilling ("don't confuse me with the facts") then at least please don't engage in personal attacks. Just let the debate go. Thanks in advance, we are all grown-ups here.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Sun Tzu

I think it would be great to have a rational debate with you crumbbum, but herein lies the problem from my perspective: I realize that points I make whether it be historically or what I’m seeing now, I should provide sources. Its reasonable to think if I ever provided a source that comprised of Arab founders that it would have a bias to it, so I never did. I used historical records, maps, and other forms of media from the UN (before discrediting that entity remember it was that in which recognized Israel’s creation), British records, records straight from http://www.archives.gov/welcome/index.html, neutral sources, and even and from Jewish funded sites. You quickly discredit these and intersect what you perceive as historical correction from either pro Zionist or Zionist sites. Any source that’s doesn’t fully agree with the expulsion of Palestinians they’re quickly discredited by you.


“Every factual statement I have said I can produce sources for. I am afraid that you have been misinformed about some things. Your post seemed sincere, and not as angry as previous ones, so I will respond civilly. You seem to believe what you are saying, but you may have learned some of these things wrong. I will go through.”


“While I wouldn't know where to find the best source, I do think that in all likelihood the party mostly likely to have the real numbers is the Israelis themselves, since they were the only ones keeping track of both the legal and illegal immigration.”


“You are merely spewing propaganda. You haven't stated any facts. I am aware of the UN record on Israel. That proves nothing. When it comes down to helping jews or getting oil contracts, there is usually no hesitation to ignore the truth.”


“Don't use the UN to learn about the reality of the region, the general consencus of the world governments is a not any sort of moral authority, if you look at history, and is dominated by petty squabbling and selfish motive, not the pursuit of real justice and truth.”

Even sources of Jewish funding that are against Zionism are labeled “small fringe groups” or show another side of whats going on that disfavors your view you state the same.
“Ok, you saw a program that interviewed some fringe Israelis, they were probably Kahanists. I'm sure there are some Israelis that think that way, but they are an extreme minority.”

“This makes them a pretty fringe group, that has gotten a great deal of media attention. I assume they are legit- many Israeli leftist groups though are funded by the EU, which makes their sincerity somewhat questionable.”

“About news today- you should be aware that most western news sources rely heavily on Palestinian sources. Journalists are frequently intimidated and given threats over publishing anything that makes the palestinians look bad.”

You truly expect someone to believe this? I think neo-Nazis stating the holocaust never happened are idiots, but some actually believe that


I know you won’t see a problem with this approach, but does anyone else? Maybe I truly am brainwashed. I’m American with a Nordic bloodline; so I know what would happen if I walked down Gaza Strip if anyone caught a look at me. This doesn’t make what’s happened and continues to happen right.



Once again I have to post some statements you made to others that stand out in my head that make it difficult for me to debate you. Its not a smear against, I assume your proud of everything you state.

”I don't have the patience to go through your claims scholastically, again, since I have already presented valid points that you have ignored. I will post a link here though- it is from the zionist organization of America- but that is not important”

That’s my point crumbbum its vitally important. There are even people of Jewish descent that disagree with the Zionist philosophy. From what I observe your taking what is their doctrine as gospel. If Im wrong about that; name one thing that you disagree with them about.

”Oh, and you're right, there is no such thing as a Palestinian people (in terms of them being a separate and distinct nation from other arabs). A palestinian, by the UN definition, is any arab that is descended from someone who lived west of the Jordan before 1948 for 2 years or more. That's it.
Hmm. . . .it strikes me a being a little odd and greatly contradictory that you would give a definition from an entity you continually state is full of lies and corrupt

While a very small minority of the palestinians are actually descended from arabs who had been in the land a long time, the vast majority are descended from arab migrant workers and laborers who went to the land seeking employment, after Jewish immigration, and their development of the land, started creating economic opportunity.” Oh that’s a nice little supplement, you wonder why theres aggression? Is this actually being taught somewhere?

"These people were not native to the land. The palestinians are made up of egyptian, syrian, jordanian, and lebanese arabs. They do not have a unique history, and they never identified themselves as a distinct people until after 1967. They never demanded statehood while Egypt occupied Gaza, or Jordan the West bank. Arafat himself is an egyptian. I will refer to "the palestinians", even though the term originally was used for the jews. They are indeed, however, not a distinct people. Sorry if my "zionist rhetoric" is too much for you, or deflates any beloved fantasies about history.”


IMO The following rationalizations do nothing but damage your intentions of convincing me of a populous the rest of the world knows was there, was actually not.

“There is more than enough available land in the vast arab world for such a state, that no one would miss, that would not cause a war.”

“Since it was the Palestinians who walked away from the peace talks, and who have overwhelmingly supported truly sickening terrorism against innocent people, I think that it is their side that should pack up and leave. Israel is less than 1% of the landmass in the middle east.”

“Why exactly do you think the Palestinian arabs deserve a state? What about the Tibetan Buddhists? What about the Kurds? There are enough people in the world that have suffered far more, and have infinitely less blood on their hands, that could use a state.”

“In your opinion, why were the Palestinian refugees left in camps for 55 years? Considering the vast sums of money poured into the camps from the US, EU, UN, and Israel (but not the arab world, incidentally), why haven't living conditions improved?”

“The palestinian refugees are the only refugees in history that have not been absorbed by any country(they could easily have been absorbed into arab countries, the language and culture is the same, and there is more than enough vacant land in the arab world). It is not Israel's fault that the Palestinian refugees exist today- it wasn't their fault that they were created.”

“Again, why the hell does no one care about the 20 year old Syrian occupation of Lebanon, which brutalizes their citizens and denies the Lebanese their freedom?”

“If Israel is evil, and robbed the Palestinians of their homeland, and is an enemy, why do so many Palestinians depend on employment in Israel? Why are 20% of Israelis arabs?”

“In 1948 the State of Israel absorbed nearly 700,000 refugees from the arab world. Why didn't anyone absorb the Palestinian arab refugees?”

Why did the Palestinians never demand a state or even autonomy before 1967 when the Egyptians and Jordanians controlled the territories?

If the Palestinians have a historical tradition, then why is it that the Jews in Palestine were referred to as "Palestinians" before 1948? Do you even realize what your saying in this statement






Double standards one sided views. . . . IMO

”Sharon was a general, and has spent his life defending his people from the enemies that they are surrounded by. He was also heavily involved in the peace with Egypt.”


“Arafat spent his life killing innocent people. Sharon spent his defending his country from those that would destroy it and massacre its inhabitants.”

“You quote ben-Gurion talking about the necessity of displacing arabs, and of gaining more land. He also said that he hoped the british would do this. He may have, in his heart, hoped for such things, but the important thing is that it wasn't done- the Jews in Palestine didn't displace any arabs with force, they purchased the land, often at excorbitant prices. In the course of the 48 war some arabs were displaced- more fled upon the urging of arab leaders. The ones that were displaced were displaced when their villages were enemy bases, or when the location was militarily critical. The refugees from those villages were still not forced to leave Palestine. Obviously, many arabs remained, and they became Israeli-arabs. The refugees that fled (again, 67% of which never saw an Israeli soldier) were then forced to remain in refugee camps instead of being absorbed in any arab country, where they have remained until this day. They had been urged, and bullied, to leave by arab leaders, and then completely abandoned.”

“You mention massacres on both sides- the only massacre carried out by jews that I am aware of was at Deir Yassin- and that has been since exploited by propagandists to smear
Israel. It doesn’t matter if other sources show this to be a lie. None of them are Zionist records. There are records of entire villages wiped out; right down to records of their names (men, women, and children, and way of death)


The following are generalized statements based on what Ive learned, seen, and experienced for myself; I see to be untrue.
“The palestinians don't, despite the brainwashing have any tangible connection to the land, with some exceptions.”

“No arab property was ever stolen or built on, they were meticulous about this.”

“And in fact there are far, far more illegal arab settlements that no one ever speaks about.”

“I am also afraid that 9/11 and Palestinian terror are very much connected.”

“Also, the region is not historically all muslim at all. It happened to have been controlled by the Ottomans for the last 800 years- but there was always a Jewish presence in the land.”

“Palestinian soveignty would be a disaster, for them, for Israel, and for the rest of the world.”





Statements of pure irony because of the source

"I am saying that it exists, but that you have not dug deep enough into the history and reality of the events over there to understand what these problems really stem from. If you were intellectually honest, and actually knew some history, we could discuss this. But I will not waste my breath indefinitely shooting down ignorant statements, generalizations, false assumptions and lies."

"Your rant about the oppression of the Palestinians is uncalled for. It cannot be compared to a massacre, as no one is trying to exterminate them. "Destroying homes, infrastructure, as well as enforcing harsh curfews which don't allow people to work or go to school" - first, there was never much infrastructure to begin with, and infrastructure is not targeted. The IDF does a huge amount humanitarian assistance in the territories that you never hear about." Another gem

You stated before I was trying to smear you, no that’s simply not true. In every conversation I’ve attempted to understand why I see you conversing the way you do. I post these things because if its me that is off course perhaps others can bring me back on.

What is your assessment of this person? www.bh.org.il/Names/POW/Goldmann.asp

You stated Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg is reguarded my a majority of Israelis as crazy.

Is that why he headed the Kever Yossev Yeshiva? That doesn’t sound like they regarded his views as crazy to me, but it’s probably a small fringe group.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

popo

Maybe I'm the one that's colorblind. I can barely see see the green.

crumbbum

This is a waste of time. You criticized me for using the UN definition of Palestinian- but the only reason I did so is because this is the definition used by the world, and since the UN has been administering the refugee camps since 1948, their definition is the used by the Palestinians themselves and the rest of the world.

You took my link to the ZOA out of context- I was referring you to a video that was hosted on that site of a lynching in Ramallah. I wasn't trying to get you to check ou the site itself because I know you wouldn't take it seriosuly. However, my purpose in posting it was the video- which is the same video regardless of where it is hosted. That was why it "didn't matter" that the host was www.zoa.org. Apparently, you didn't watch the video, since you never commented on it.

You still have not given facts to invalidate my points. I have not said that the sources from Jews that want to make more concessions or blame their own country for the terror against is illegitimate- but you post as if that perspective was the truth, and I am saying that such views only represent a very small minority (stockholm syndrome comes to mind). When was the last time you heard such internal criticism coming from the Palestinians? Do you know why you haven't? It is because if a Palestinian publicly protests against the actions of Yasser Arafat or the Palestinian authority, they are labelled a "collaborator with Israel" and killed publicly. Israel is a democracy, people have free speech, people can disagree with the government, even if their doing so is misguided or stupid. Everyone is allowed their opinion. Posting links to groups with such viewpoints doesn't convince me, or anyone, of anything. I am aware that some people feel that way. So what?

As for you de-legitimizing my statements about the history about the region, I can back up everything I say with sources, statistics, etc. I am not saying anything here that isn't based on historical fact. What is your point in bringing up these random individuals? Nahum Goldmann? I think I recall you mentioning him before, but I don't know much about him. What does this have to do with what I'm saying? If you think what I have said regarding the origins and roots of the conflict are wrong, then go ahead and prove me wrong. You haven't thus far, you have only attempted to delegitize my opinions. That is not appropriate.

If you think the terrorism is Israel's fault, and that Israel should withdraw to the post 1948 borders, (as I am assuming you do). then there are certain questions you have to answer. How do you deal with terrorism? How do you make concessions without legitimizing such methods? How do you know that such concessions will lead to peace, and not more war, when PLO and Palestinian leaders have made public statements, especially to their own people, that their real goal is destroying Israel? How do you know that they want a state in order to live in peace, and not merely as a stepping stone towards destroying Israel, as they have established in principle with the PLO's 1974 plan that Pop referenced above? Do people that want peace condone the mass murder of innocent people? Is it ok to kill Jews? Should there be no consequences for murder? Is there anything wrong with rewarding terrorism? What about worldwide terrorism, don't you think that rewarding in one place encourages it in other places? Why should Israel make concessions when the Palestinians have never let up on killing for more than 55 years, and when they have in no way proven or demonstrated any sincerity about any "peace"(indeed, it is just the opposite). Why should Israel let them even closer to her population centers, when they refuse to control the terrorists in their midst? All these questions are ones you have to answer for your position to be legitimate.

Also, I don't advocate the sudden expulsion of the Palestinians. I think that there should be penalties if the terror and incitement in schools and media doesn't stop. I think perhaps ultimatums are necessary- stop the terror and clean up the schools by X date, or Israel annexes, say, 10% of the territories (this is just a general principle, I don't know about details). And this should continue until terror and incitement stop. If they would live in peace I would have no objection to them staying where they are. I just don't think that any concessions should be made if they will only increase violence, which at this time they will, and I think that in addition to not rewarding hatred and terror, there should in fact be consequences for such behavior and actions. There has not been in the recent past. For example, even though the Palestinians did not live up to a single one of their agreements in Oslo, there was no consequence, and after the bloodiest 10 years of terrorism in ISrael's history, now the world is pushing to offer them even more than was offered then. That sends a dangerous message. Both sides of the conflict need to be held accountable to human standards, and to agreements that are made, not just Israel. What you are advocating, Sun-Tzu, is the consequence-free murder of Jews and the rewarding, and ultimate triumph of, terrorism against the West. Which position is more nazi-like?

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Sun Tzu

I'll agree with you on one point; this is a waste of time.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Sun Tzu

Under UNRWA's operational definition, Palestine refugees are persons whose normal place of residence was PALESTINE between June 1946 and May 1948, WHO LOST BOTH THEIR HOMES AND LIVELIHOOD as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict. It also covers the descendants of persons who became refugees in 1948.


”Oh, and you're right, there is no such thing as a Palestinian people (in terms of them being a separate and distinct nation from other arabs). A palestinian, by the UN definition, is any arab that is descended from someone WHO LIVED WEST OF THE JORDAN BEFORE 1948 for 2 years or more. That's it. While a very small minority of the palestinians are actually descended from arabs who had been in the land a long time, the vast majority are descended from arab migrant workers and laborers who went to the land seeking employment, after Jewish immigration, and their development of the land, started creating economic opportunity.” These people were not native to the land. THE PALESTINIANS ARE MADE UP OF EGYPTIAN, SYRIAN, JORDANIAN, AND LEBANESE ARABS. They do not have a unique history, and they never identified themselves as a distinct people until after 1967. They never demanded statehood while Egypt occupied Gaza, or Jordan the West bank. Arafat himself is an egyptian. I will refer to "the palestinians", even though the term originally was used for the jews. They are indeed, however, not a distinct people.

crumbbum although I know its counterproductive to assume I know what goes on in the minds of other people: I'll assume this time that it wasnt you that changed the wording, but infact you got it from another source that you felt was based on facts. Incase you don't catch what Im referring to or in the event you would possibly downplay this a just a couple words I'll point it out to you. This is the root of what Im saying: when a group; any group; whether they be caucasion, black, hispanic, Catholic, Jewish, Russian, American, etc becomes tunnel visioned to a cause the beneficial only to them they see their way as THE way. Whatever steps that need to be taken to insure this will be even if that s means changing history. With the switching of two words an entire belief is created thats simply not true.

From Palestine to anything west of Jordan. That would give substance to the possibility of PALESTINIANS ARE MADE UP OF EGYPTIAN, SYRIAN, JORDANIAN, AND LEBANESE ARABS. Where did you get your version of that definition? Could you please provide a source for that? Im going to make another assumption: your either going to ignore what I've just presented; rationalize it in a way that doesnt address what Ive presented; or maintain that the UN is irrelevent anyway eluding to what I interpret as a global conspiracy against Israel. Again that is what I interpret I wont paste your posts referencing this, but I have plenty if you need a refresher. If somehow Ive appealed to your since of reason with this example, can you even begin to see the inherent danger in this? What would be the motive behind such actions?

You took my link to the ZOA out of context- I was referring you to a video that was hosted on that site of a lynching in Ramallah. I wasn't trying to get you to check ou the site itself because I know you wouldn't take it seriosuly.
No I didn’t. For one I told you I had that video (Arafats war rallies). I was stating everything I saw you putting as a source was 100% pro-Zionist, it was the same point I was making now. How am I taking that out of context?

Also, I don't advocate the sudden expulsion of the Palestinians.

Well sir. . . . please excuse me for seeing these statements as being hypocritical. Then again you do put the word “sudden” in there. I don’t know if that was an attempt at being sly with words or it truly doesn’t mean anything.

“Oh, and the Palestinians are not indigenous.”

“I do not support a Palestinian state west of the Jordan.”

“Since it was the Palestinians who walked away from the peace talks, and who have overwhelmingly supported truly sickening terrorism against innocent people, I think that it is their side that should pack up and leave.”

“The arab world is not only humongous, but in many places very underpopulated. The world should set up a palestinian state somewhere else, where both parties then will be able to live in peace, without the risk and overwhelming likelihood of all out war.”

Ofcourse you don’t want them thrown out, it sounds like nothing of the sort.

You still have not given facts to invalidate my points.

You either ignore the sources I have posted or quickly write them off following with stance the Israel will have more accurate documentation than anyone. Are you attempting in some form or fashion to convey to me that there is no reason at all; Zionists (not Jews-big difference) would have to promote stance that historically, and factually do not concur with records that exsist outside of Zionist founded creators. (Like what I presented from the records of the British Mandate compared to what you provided. After tracking down the source you even stated the numbers were off; yet 2 sentences later you maintain Israel's records are factual.

If there is anything inside of you that would allow you to step back and look at this from an outside position; it difficult for me to understand how the obvious could not be observed.

You ask for facts you know Ive posted them, you know I provided sources; in some cases even pictures of the original records opposed to just typing them. Yet you say the same thing I see you stating with everyone that has debated you. You either ignore what they said, or confidently seemingly correct them with sources you maintain are the facts and nothing but.

As for you de-legitimizing my statements about the history about the region, I can back up everything I say with sources, statistics, etc. I am not saying anything here that isn't based on historical fact.

OK crumbbum heres the electronic stage and its all yours; provide sources that the world, not a small group of it sees as historical fact. I'm open eyes, ears, and mind. Please post as many sources you see as being factual and I will research them with a completely open mind and neutral position.

Weve already seen where some of Bards sources can lead to, Im sure you dont rely on him anyway.

Heres a few sources of mine used in our conversations whose facts you either ignored, or felt werent factual.

http://www.un.org/ha/index.html

http://www.archives.gov/research_room/index.html

www.hmc.gov.uk/

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

crumbbum

Sun-Tzu, your main complaint against me in this thread makes me laugh. When I say that a Palestinian is any Arab who lived for 2 years or more West of the Jordan, this is totally accurate. THIS WAS THE PALESTINE MANDATE (actually, it also included Jordan, but that was given to the arabs long before the 1948 war). What you refer to as "Palestine" was the British Palestine mandate. There was no country there, or autonomous political entity of any kind by the name of "Palestine" as you seem to imply. So to say that a "Palestinian", in reference to the Palestinian arabs, is descended from someone who lived two years or more West of the Jordan is the exact same thing as saying they lived in "Palestine". Because to be a Palestinian today, by the UN definition of a Palestinian that you conveniently posted, they must be descended from someone who lived in the land at least 2 years, and lost their job/property in the area in the 1948 war. Obviously no Arabs in Jordan lost their homes in the war, so one can conclude deductively that they must have been living West of the Jordan. So that said, what on earth are you talking about? "Palestine" wasn't a country, Sun-Tzu, it was a province, a territory, which the British controlled, and the Ottomans before them, and the crusaders, before them, and the Romans before them, and the Jews before the Romans. There was never a country there- in fact the only sovereign political entities that ever existed there were the ancient Jewish kingdoms, and the State of Israel today. I don't really understand what your problem was with my statement, or what your point is.

The territory of Palestine was extremely underpopulated until the mid-late 1800's, when Jewish immigration began. As the Jews came, they began developing the land, which created emplyment opportunities for the Arabs. There was a great deal of cooperation and co-existence early on. Arab immigration to the land spiked with the arrival of the Jews. The numbers don't lie, the UN numbers will clearly show this. This is what I have been saying- some of the Palestinian arabs are part of families that actually lived in the land for many generations, but the vast majority of the Palestinians are descended from Arabs from the surrounding countries who came to the area seeking employment, and most Palestinians in 1948 do cannot trace any family presence there past perhaps 2 generations. There is a reason the UN definition of a Palestinian is so liberal- most of them hadn't been there very long at all. This is also part of the reason why the 67% of them who fled the land before the war, without ever having seen an Israeli soldier, had few qualms about abandoning their homes and property. Though I don't know for sure, common sense would lead me to believe that the Palestinians who actualyl had significant roots in the land would be greater-represented among those who stayed(and subsequently became Israeli citizens). Among the 33% who were evacuated or expelled during the war by the Israelis, a very small minority I'm sure also have significant roots in the land. Those people deserve to be compensated for their loss. Perhaps the model used could be the way that reparatory payments were made by Germany to the children of Holocaust survivors (not to compare the two events, being evicted from a home cannot be compared to having genocide commited against you), but no one can realistically expect the State of Israel to repatriate their descendants now. Not only that, but it must also be remembered that there would never have been any refugees at all if the Arabs hadn't launched the war! Also, there have never been any reparations made to the 800,000 Jews who lost their homes, livelihoods and belongings when they fled to Israel. Maybe it would be just to just have both sides drop their claims. Not only is the idea of repatriation ridiculous and totally unprecedented, but the fact is that most Palestinians today are extremely hostile to Israel, and would never declare loyalty to the State of Israel. But the fact of the matter is that such individuals were a small minority then, and in terms of finding a solution for all of the Palestinians today, one must take into consideration that the vast majority are not descended from families with significant ties to the land. Most are descended from Arab migrant workers who came seeking employment not long before 1948. They came from Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, etc. The "Palestinians" never identified themselves as a distinct nation until after the 1967 war (under the PLOs tutillage). So what is the purpose of their nationhood, if it isn't historically accurate?(I am sure that the Palestinians today very much consider themselves PALESTINIANS first and foremost, just like most believe that there was a glorious country of "Palestine" that was stolen from them. Let's remember that they are living in a controlled autocratic society, where the government controls not only the schools, but all forms of media. There is no free speech, so it is easy to indoctrinate the public with propaganda over time, as is done in most arab countries.

"You took my link to the ZOA out of context- I was referring you to a video that was hosted on that site of a lynching in Ramallah. I wasn't trying to get you to check ou the site itself because I know you wouldn't take it seriosuly."
"No I didn’t. For one I told you I had that video (Arafats war rallies). I was stating everything I saw you putting as a source was 100% pro-Zionist, it was the same point I was making now. How am I taking that out of context?"

The clip I wanted you to see was that of the lynching of two Israeli reservists who got lost and accidentally wandered into Ramallah. How is it in any way relevant if the site hosting the video is "100% pro-zionist"? Does this change the video itself? I just wanted you to see the footage, which was shot by an italian journalist. It was about halfway through the movie I linked to. I don't care if you read the site or watch the rest of the video. It happened to be the only place I could find the video. And anyway, facts are facts. It doesn't matter what the perspective of the presenter is if they are providing facts- they might be interpreting them a certain way, but if it is accurate what does it matter where it comes from? In this case, the clip is the clip, it doesn't matter where it is hosted! For heaven's sake.

As far as my being against a Palestinian state West of the Jordan, I am indeed against it. I wouldn't be if it would lead to peace. When I say that I might support such a thing, this means that I would support it if the Palestinians truly wanted to live in peace, and that that would end the conflict, and that making 2 states in that land was, in reality, possible. Since none of these things are true in the current reality, I am against it. I would never advocate expelling anyone if I thought there was some better way to end the bloodshed and find a solution for both peoples. And also, when I say "expell" I mean, in reality, rehabilitating them as well. The world should help them set up a new state in a place where it won't lead to war, or bring back to the region the nightmare of the Arab countries themselves thinking they can destroy Israel(which, as a result of all the "peace" processes, is already starting to be resurrected, and has been obviously among the Palestinians (hence the last 2-3 years of such terrorism). Until Arab rejectionism of the State of Israel has ended, and EVERYONE TRULY wants peace, not just concessions in order to weaken Israel, or a State with which to attack ISrael, any more unilateral Israeli concessions, world talk of a Palestinian state West of the Jordan, and the like are only keeping the violence going, and stoking the fires of Arab hatred and rejectionism. There will be peace when the Arab world is ready to live in peace with the State of Israel, and to accept it's existence as a fact of life. Then all parties would be able to benefit from the economic cooperation and cultural, technological, agricultural, medical, (etc.) cooperation that would surely follow. So while in principle I wouldn't be against a Palestinian state, because of the intentions of their leadership and the indocrination of most of the Palestinians themselves with hatred and rejectionism, and also just because it's wrong considering the history of the conflict, that in fact it would be giving the "seal of approval" to a collection of lies and fallacies, I am against it now. If the truth were aired on all sides, and everyone really wanted peace, and if terror had truly been rejected and abandoned, and all dreams of destroying Israel forgotten- if the Palestinians wanted a state where they could pursue their own future for the sake of life, I would perhaps be supportive of such a state where it is being discussed now. But the current reality is so unbelievably far from that that there is no way that I in good conscience could ever support such a state.

With regard to "zionist figures" and my using Israeli numbers, I suggested with regard to that specific statistic, the numbers for Jewish immigration, that the Israeli figures would likely be the most accurate. This is because most of the Jewish immigration came about under the nose of the British. Refugees and Holocaust survivors were smuggled in in large numbers by the Haganah. Since no one else knew this was happening, or at least since they had no way of keeping track of it, it is likely that the Israelis themselves have the most accurate numbers for Jewish immigration in those years, since tget are the only ones who could possibly have accurate numbers. And anyway, why would they distort the numbers of their own immigrants, used in their own records and censuses? There is good reason that I would go with their numbers in that instance, that is just logic. No other source even has a chance of being accurate. Also, Israel is a 1st world country, with a serious university system, a free press(that is often very critical of the government), etc.- it is not a closed society where there are no watchdogs. If they were falsifying information, plenty of Israelis would protest (and you'd likely hear about it such allegations on the website you have posted from far-left Israelis. Anyway, my usage of the Israeli numbers was for that particular statistic. Also with regard to the Arabs who stayed during the war and became ISraeli citizens, I would be inclined to trust these numbers for the same reasons because they were drawn up by census of Israel's citizens! The numbers weren't drawn up for the sake of propaganda(which Israel has been terrible at), they were drawn up for the government's usage and records. The British numbers for the Jewish population pre-1948 are not so trustworthy because they were under a great deal of pressure from their Arab allies to prevent Jewish immigration, and this was the reason that they set up detention camps for Holocaust survivors who were trying to escape to Palestine (such as the ones at Cyprus). If any of the numbers in this situation are suspect, the British numbers are. They were under a lot of pressure, and it is likely that they intentionally UNDERestimated as much as possible the numbers of Jews.

And as far as the difference between Zionists and Jews, ALL Jews who are religious in any way (and all Jews were until less than 150 years ago) are Zionists. Ever since they were sent into exile by the Romans, Orthodox Jews prayed facing Jerusalem, 3x a day, and in their prayers constantly prayed for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and to be brought back to their home. So all religious Jews, and most secular Jews are Zionists. In fact, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said to a student of his that professed to be anti-zionist, "You are talking anti-semitism. Anti-zionism is anti-semitism."
What about the Holocaust survivors, who, after leaving the death camps as human skeletons, regained their health, and fled Europe to Palestine only to be handed a rifle, to defend against another war of annihilation- are you against them, Sun-Tzu? Can you honestly say that there shouldn't be a Jewish state? If you are in fact "anti-Zionist", then I don't think I want to continue this discussion. The need for a Jewish state is so overwhelmingly obvious that even the UN couldn't ignore it. And the right of Jews to live in Israel is also overwhelmingly obvious. The middle east has never been exclusively Arab, as many seem to think today. The assyrian greeks were not arab, the Israelites weren't arab, the Iranians aren't Arab. No one has a right to try to exterminate a people. I am so sick of the excuses made for racism and hate on the part of the Arabs, when such behavior would be unequivocally condemned if it happened here, or anywhere else.

Oh, by the way, did you read the news tonite? Palestinians shot up a car off the major Israeli highway. In it were two little girls and a little boy, being driven home by their grandfather from a Bat Mitzvah. The grandfather was wounded, as was the boy and a 5 year old girl. The 7 year old girl was killed. I suppose that girl had it coming, right Sun-Tzu? The Palestinians that shot her, they were "activists", out "protesting" right? Or maybe, as the people who are pushing the Road Map would put it, her murder is part of the "price of peace". The emperor wears no clothes, Sun-Tzu. I wish you could admit it to yourself.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

Sun-Tzu, your main complaint against me in this thread makes me laugh. When I say that a Palestinian is any Arab who lived for 2 years or more West of the Jordan, this is totally accurate. THIS WAS THE PALESTINE MANDATE (actually, it also included Jordan, but that was given to the arabs long before the 1948 war). What you refer to as "Palestine" was the British Palestine mandate. There was no country there, or autonomous political entity of any kind by the name of "Palestine" as you seem to imply. So to say that a "Palestinian", in reference to the Palestinian arabs, is descended from someone who lived two years or more West of the Jordan is the exact same thing as saying they lived in "Palestine". Because to be a Palestinian today, by the UN definition of a Palestinian that you conveniently posted, they must be descended from someone who lived in the land at least 2 years, and lost their job/property in the area in the 1948 war. Obviously no Arabs in Jordan lost their homes in the war, so one can conclude deductively that they must have been living West of the Jordan. So that said, what on earth are you talking about? "Palestine" wasn't a country, Sun-Tzu, it was a province, a territory, which the British controlled, and the Ottomans before them, and the crusaders, before them, and the Romans before them, and the Jews before the Romans. There was never a country there- in fact the only sovereign political entities that ever existed there were the ancient Jewish kingdoms, and the State of Israel today. I don't really understand what your problem was with my statement, or what your point is.

The territory of Palestine was extremely underpopulated until the mid-late 1800's, when Jewish immigration began. As the Jews came, they began developing the land, which created emplyment opportunities for the Arabs. There was a great deal of cooperation and co-existence early on. Arab immigration to the land spiked with the arrival of the Jews. The numbers don't lie, the UN numbers will clearly show this. This is what I have been saying- some of the Palestinian arabs are part of families that actually lived in the land for many generations, but the vast majority of the Palestinians are descended from Arabs from the surrounding countries who came to the area seeking employment, and most Palestinians in 1948 do cannot trace any family presence there past perhaps 2 generations. There is a reason the UN definition of a Palestinian is so liberal- most of them hadn't been there very long at all. This is also part of the reason why the 67% of them who fled the land before the war, without ever having seen an Israeli soldier, had few qualms about abandoning their homes and property. Though I don't know for sure, common sense would lead me to believe that the Palestinians who actualyl had significant roots in the land would be greater-represented among those who stayed(and subsequently became Israeli citizens). Among the 33% who were evacuated or expelled during the war by the Israelis, a very small minority I'm sure also have significant roots in the land. Those people deserve to be compensated for their loss. Perhaps the model used could be the way that reparatory payments were made by Germany to the children of Holocaust survivors (not to compare the two events, being evicted from a home cannot be compared to having genocide commited against you), but no one can realistically expect the State of Israel to repatriate their descendants now. Not only that, but it must also be remembered that there would never have been any refugees at all if the Arabs hadn't launched the war! Also, there have never been any reparations made to the 800,000 Jews who lost their homes, livelihoods and belongings when they fled to Israel. Maybe it would be just to just have both sides drop their claims. Not only is the idea of repatriation ridiculous and totally unprecedented, but the fact is that most Palestinians today are extremely hostile to Israel, and would never declare loyalty to the State of Israel. But the fact of the matter is that such individuals were a small minority then, and in terms of finding a solution for all of the Palestinians today, one must take into consideration that the vast majority are not descended from families with significant ties to the land. Most are descended from Arab migrant workers who came seeking employment not long before 1948. They came from Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, etc. The "Palestinians" never identified themselves as a distinct nation until after the 1967 war (under the PLOs tutillage). So what is the purpose of their nationhood, if it isn't historically accurate?(I am sure that the Palestinians today very much consider themselves PALESTINIANS first and foremost, just like most believe that there was a glorious country of "Palestine" that was stolen from them. Let's remember that they are living in a controlled autocratic society, where the government controls not only the schools, but all forms of media. There is no free speech, so it is easy to indoctrinate the public with propaganda over time, as is done in most arab countries.

"You took my link to the ZOA out of context- I was referring you to a video that was hosted on that site of a lynching in Ramallah. I wasn't trying to get you to check ou the site itself because I know you wouldn't take it seriosuly."
"No I didn’t. For one I told you I had that video (Arafats war rallies). I was stating everything I saw you putting as a source was 100% pro-Zionist, it was the same point I was making now. How am I taking that out of context?"

The clip I wanted you to see was that of the lynching of two Israeli reservists who got lost and accidentally wandered into Ramallah. How is it in any way relevant if the site hosting the video is "100% pro-zionist"? Does this change the video itself? I just wanted you to see the footage, which was shot by an italian journalist. It was about halfway through the movie I linked to. I don't care if you read the site or watch the rest of the video. It happened to be the only place I could find the video. And anyway, facts are facts. It doesn't matter what the perspective of the presenter is if they are providing facts- they might be interpreting them a certain way, but if it is accurate what does it matter where it comes from? In this case, the clip is the clip, it doesn't matter where it is hosted! For heaven's sake.

As far as my being against a Palestinian state West of the Jordan, I am indeed against it. I wouldn't be if it would lead to peace. When I say that I might support such a thing, this means that I would support it if the Palestinians truly wanted to live in peace, and that that would end the conflict, and that making 2 states in that land was, in reality, possible. Since none of these things are true in the current reality, I am against it. I would never advocate expelling anyone if I thought there was some better way to end the bloodshed and find a solution for both peoples. And also, when I say "expell" I mean, in reality, rehabilitating them as well. The world should help them set up a new state in a place where it won't lead to war, or bring back to the region the nightmare of the Arab countries themselves thinking they can destroy Israel(which, as a result of all the "peace" processes, is already starting to be resurrected, and has been obviously among the Palestinians (hence the last 2-3 years of such terrorism). Until Arab rejectionism of the State of Israel has ended, and EVERYONE TRULY wants peace, not just concessions in order to weaken Israel, or a State with which to attack ISrael, any more unilateral Israeli concessions, world talk of a Palestinian state West of the Jordan, and the like are only keeping the violence going, and stoking the fires of Arab hatred and rejectionism. There will be peace when the Arab world is ready to live in peace with the State of Israel, and to accept it's existence as a fact of life. Then all parties would be able to benefit from the economic cooperation and cultural, technological, agricultural, medical, (etc.) cooperation that would surely follow. So while in principle I wouldn't be against a Palestinian state, because of the intentions of their leadership and the indocrination of most of the Palestinians themselves with hatred and rejectionism, and also just because it's wrong considering the history of the conflict, that in fact it would be giving the "seal of approval" to a collection of lies and fallacies, I am against it now. If the truth were aired on all sides, and everyone really wanted peace, and if terror had truly been rejected and abandoned, and all dreams of destroying Israel forgotten- if the Palestinians wanted a state where they could pursue their own future for the sake of life, I would perhaps be supportive of such a state where it is being discussed now. But the current reality is so unbelievably far from that that there is no way that I in good conscience could ever support such a state.

With regard to "zionist figures" and my using Israeli numbers, I suggested with regard to that specific statistic, the numbers for Jewish immigration, that the Israeli figures would likely be the most accurate. This is because most of the Jewish immigration came about under the nose of the British. Refugees and Holocaust survivors were smuggled in in large numbers by the Haganah. Since no one else knew this was happening, or at least since they had no way of keeping track of it, it is likely that the Israelis themselves have the most accurate numbers for Jewish immigration in those years, since tget are the only ones who could possibly have accurate numbers. And anyway, why would they distort the numbers of their own immigrants, used in their own records and censuses? There is good reason that I would go with their numbers in that instance, that is just logic. No other source even has a chance of being accurate. Also, Israel is a 1st world country, with a serious university system, a free press(that is often very critical of the government), etc.- it is not a closed society where there are no watchdogs. If they were falsifying information, plenty of Israelis would protest (and you'd likely hear about it such allegations on the website you have posted from far-left Israelis. Anyway, my usage of the Israeli numbers was for that particular statistic. Also with regard to the Arabs who stayed during the war and became ISraeli citizens, I would be inclined to trust these numbers for the same reasons because they were drawn up by census of Israel's citizens! The numbers weren't drawn up for the sake of propaganda(which Israel has been terrible at), they were drawn up for the government's usage and records. The British numbers for the Jewish population pre-1948 are not so trustworthy because they were under a great deal of pressure from their Arab allies to prevent Jewish immigration, and this was the reason that they set up detention camps for Holocaust survivors who were trying to escape to Palestine (such as the ones at Cyprus). If any of the numbers in this situation are suspect, the British numbers are. They were under a lot of pressure, and it is likely that they intentionally UNDERestimated as much as possible the numbers of Jews.

And as far as the difference between Zionists and Jews, ALL Jews who are religious in any way (and all Jews were until less than 150 years ago) are Zionists. Ever since they were sent into exile by the Romans, Orthodox Jews prayed facing Jerusalem, 3x a day, and in their prayers constantly prayed for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and to be brought back to their home. So all religious Jews, and most secular Jews are Zionists. In fact, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said to a student of his that professed to be anti-zionist, "You are talking anti-semitism. Anti-zionism is anti-semitism."
What about the Holocaust survivors, who, after leaving the death camps as human skeletons, regained their health, and fled Europe to Palestine only to be handed a rifle, to defend against another war of annihilation- are you against them, Sun-Tzu? Can you honestly say that there shouldn't be a Jewish state? If you are in fact "anti-Zionist", then I don't think I want to continue this discussion. The need for a Jewish state is so overwhelmingly obvious that even the UN couldn't ignore it. And the right of Jews to live in Israel is also overwhelmingly obvious. The middle east has never been exclusively Arab, as many seem to think today. The assyrian greeks were not arab, the Israelites weren't arab, the Iranians aren't Arab. No one has a right to try to exterminate a people. I am so sick of the excuses made for racism and hate on the part of the Arabs, when such behavior would be unequivocally condemned if it happened here, or anywhere else.

Oh, by the way, did you read the news tonite? Palestinians shot up a car off the major Israeli highway. In it were two little girls and a little boy, being driven home by their grandfather from a Bat Mitzvah. The grandfather was wounded, as was the boy and a 5 year old girl. Her sister, 7 years old, was shot and killed. I suppose that girl had it coming, I bet she was a Zionist. The Palestinians that shot her, they were "activists", out "protesting" right? Or maybe, as the people who are pushing the Road Map would put it, her murder is part of the "price of peace". The emperor wears no clothes, Sun-Tzu. I wish you could admit it to yourself.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Sun Tzu

These deaths were in not in combat situations, and only a small segment of a long and growing list. No terrorist held them up in front of themselves as some might hope. I guess they deserved to die as well huh crumbbum? They were all a bunch of terrorists, the really nasty ones may have even went up against tanks with their super dangerous rocks.

I thought you were past this. The fact is we could go back and forth like this for decades. That doesn’t change what the truth is. If it makes you feel a certain way to post daily obituaries; go ahead. As far as inferring I’m happy about shit like that your teetering on that edge once again. As far as inferring I thought that little girl was a Zionist; you said it not me.

Silwan-Live bullet in the chest-age 15- Nizar Ibrahim

Nablus- Live bullet in the head-age 5- Khalid Adli El – Bazian

Ramallah- Live bullet in the chest-age 16- Nizar Mahmoud Eideh

El-Burij-Live bullets in chest &abdomen-age12-Mohammed Jamal El -Dorra

Nablus- Heavy caliber bullet in the head-age 10- Samer Sameer Tabanja

Ramallah- Live bullet in the head-age 7- Mohammed Nabil Dawood

Salfeit -Nablus Live bullet in the head-age 6- Sarah AbdelAzim Abdel–Haq

Gaza – Bani Sohaila Live bullet in the back-age 9- Mohammed Yousif Abu Assi

Tulkarim-Live bullet in the heart-age 7- Mohammed Khaled

Bethlehem- Two live bullets in chest &abdomen-age 13 Mu’aiad O. Ali El Jawareesh

Gaza- Under rubble from missle Age 5- Mohammed MAhmoud El Howaiti

Gaza- Under the rubble- age 3- Ahmed Mohammed El Shawwa

Gaza- Under the rubble-age 2 months old Dalia Raed Mattar

Gaza- Under rubble from missle- age 4- Mahmoud Raed Mattar

Gaza- (bombardment)- age 2- Aymen raed Mattar

Gaza-(bombardment0-age 2- Ala'a Mohammed Mattar- 11

Tabaraq Jaber Oudeh, a 2-year old girl with cerebral palsy from Deir Al Hatab, Nablus. Tabaraq died from complications that ensued after she ran out of her medication and was prohibited access to medical treatment for several days.



---Norman G. Finkelstein received his doctorate from the Department of Politics, Princeton University, for a thesis on the theory of Zionism. He is the author of four books: Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict (Verso, 1995), The Rise and Fall of Palestine (University of Minnesota, 1996), with Ruth Bettina Birn, A Nation on Trial: The Goldhagen Thesis and Historical Truth (Henry Holt,1998) and The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering (Verso, 2000). His writings have appeared in prestigous journals such as the London Review of Books, Index on Censorship, Journal of Palestine Studies, New Left Review, Middle East Report, Christian Science Monitor and Al Ahram Weekly. Currently he teaches political science at DePaul University in Chicago.

Norman Finkelstein was born in Brooklyn, N.Y., in 1953. He is the son of Maryla Husyt Finkelstein, survivor of the Warsaw Ghetto, Maidanek concentration camp, and Zacharias Finkelstein, survivor of the Warsaw Ghetto, Auschwitz concentration camp. He dedicated his first book to his parents in which he wrote: "May I never forgive or forget what was done to them." His brothers Richard and Henry Finkelstein would like all visitors to this web site to know that the surviving family fully supports Norman's efforts to maintain the integrity of the history of the Nazi holocaust. May we never forgive or forget what was done.----

I would say aside from the multitudes of Jewish individuals you think don’t exsist that know better, this man may be just a little qualified to understand the words coming out of his mouth. You wont convince me or IMO anyone else he a radical fringe Jew.

Here is his perspective

To resolve what was called the "Jewish question" - i.e., the reciprocal challenges of Gentile repulsion or anti-Semitism and Gentile attraction or assimilation - the Zionist movement sought in the late nineteenth century to create an overwhelmingly, if not homogeneously, Jewish state in Palestine. (1) Once the Zionist movement gained a foothold in Palestine through Great Britain's issuance of the Balfour Declaration, (2) the main obstacle to realizing its goal was the indigenous Arab population. For, on the eve of Zionist colonization, Palestine was overwhelmingly not Jewish but Muslim and Christian Arab. (3)

Across the mainstream Zionist spectrum, it was understood from the outset that Palestine's indigenous Arab population would not acquiesce in its dispossession. "Contrary to the claim that is often made, Zionism was not blind to the presence of Arabs in Palestine," Zeev Sternhell observes. "If Zionist intellectuals and leaders ignored the Arab dilemma, it was chiefly because they knew that this problem had no solution within the Zionist way of thinking…. [I]n general both sides understood each other well and knew that the implementation of Zionism could be only at the expense of the Palestinian Arabs." Moshe Shertok (later Sharett) contemptuously dismissed the "illusive hopes" of those who spoke about a "'mutual misunderstanding' between us and the Arabs, about 'common interests' [and] about 'the possibility of unity and peace between the two fraternal peoples.'" "There is no example in history," David Ben-Gurion declared, succinctly framing the core problem, "that a nation opens the gates of its country, not because of necessity…but because the nation which wants to come in has explained its desire to it."


Crumbbum you think your going to educate me on what Zionism is? I’m not Jewish “fringe groups” or not it seems you have no idea how many Jews are against Zionism. Im going to ask you once again not to attempt to link a disreguard for human life as you rudely have done once again. I have a television set just like you sir. I hate hearing about innocent people dying, Ive seen enough death personally to last several lifetimes. Again you appear to be suggesting that I don’t.




http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf

http://www.rense.com/general35/against.htm

http://www.netureikartauk.org/neuberger.html


http://www.phr.org.il/phr/Pages/PhrHomepage.asp

http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/


www.jewsagainstzionism.com/

www.jppi.org/

www.jewsagainsttheoccupation.org

www.jvao.org/

www.petitiononline.com/JvO1/

www.converge.org.nz/pma/cra0672.htm

http://www.nimn.org/


www.cam.org/~rsilver/jewspeakout.htm

www.eccmei.net/~eccmei/j/host/JATO.html

http://www.jewishpeacefellowship.org/

www.meguiar.addr.com/jews_protest_Zionism.htm

http://www.netureikartauk.org/pictures.html

http://www.rhr.israel.net/overview.shtml

http://www.peacenow.org/shalom_achshav.html

http://www.nif.org/search.cfm

http://www.gush-shalom.org/english/


http://www.batshalom.org/

http://voteforusa.com/jewsforusa/

http://www.americanfreepress.net/04_...Against_Zioni/ rabbis_speak_out_against_zioni.html
http://home.t-online.de/home/Koch.He...%20Zionism.htm

www.codoh.com/zionweb/ziondark/zionoppdex.html

http://www.searchforjustice.org/

Tell them that Zionism is the same as Judaism. There are a few thousand Rabbis I’m sure would love for you to try and tell them what life’s all about.

You stated no one has the right to exterminate people, your damn right they don’t, or steal their land for that matter.

I don’t know why it’s taken me so long to understand why no one else has engaged in what I see as -------I’ll have to stop here, this is useless. Dead end. I don’t know if anyone followed this or the ones in the past, but the scenario speaks for itself. I can say I’ve learned two things what its like attempting to have a factual debate against a particular type of mindset, and there really is a radical fringe Jewish group out there, I just didn’t comprehend how radical.

I know truly I have to stay out of threads with this issue, because I don’t have within myself to sit back, read the material you post, and say nothing. I finally understand that no matter how much you deny, what people that don’t agree with you know, no matter how many factual history lessons you believe your giving, in the end it all speaks for itself, and apparently that’s real enough for you.






On a final note crumbbum nothing you post makes me laugh, there's nothing funny about it, and I'll as politely as possible stop there.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

crumbbum

By posting links to sites representing Jews who are against Zionism, you prove absolutely nothing. The fact that Jews disagree with each other proves nothing. As far as anti-Zionism among Jews goes, it is mostly championed (among Hassidic Jews) by a small minority of the various Hassidic sects- they are against the State of Israel because it is a secular state. They believe that that the only Jewish state should be a religious one, that will be born with the coming of the messiah. The vast majority of Hasidic sect are in fact totally pro-Israel however. As far as leftist Jewish anti-Zionists, so what else is new? Again, you are trying to convince me that there are some Jews that disagree, as though that is conclusive evidence that one side or the other is correct. It isn't. You have demonstrated that there are Jews that disagree with each other. But this is not some kind of revelation to the world, or to me. Showing that there exist Jews who disagree does not make their position correct, or anything other than misguided (or vice versa). I expect to discuss and back up your position itself, because this proves nothing.

Your pictures also prove nothing, whether of the anti-Zionist Jews or of the soldier. First of all it isn't clear exactly where he is pointing the gun, and anyway so what? It looks like he is pointing it to the left, at something out of the frame of the picture. But even if you were to show me a picture of him clearly pointing it at the kid, it would do nothing more than to show that it is an immature and unprofessional soldier on a power trip- this would have absolutely nothing to do with the roots of the conflict, or what should be done about it.

As for your list of Palestinian kids who have been casualties, so what? Again, Palestinian kids get killed in the following ways- when they are used as human shields (like when wanted terrorists surround themselves with them, or when Palestinian snipers shoot from behind them), when they threaten soldiers lives (these "rocks" are often Molotov cocktails- why are kids on the battlefield in the first place Sun-Tzu? Why are they encouraged in their schools, in their media, and by their society to become "martyrs", and to put their lives in danger by confronting armed soldiers? It's not spontaneous, as you seem to believe. If a crowd of screaming kids with rocks surround and starts pelting a soldier with rocks, the soldiers life is often threatened. Rocks crack skulls- the sickening thing is that child soldiers are used in this conflict in order to generate sympathy from suckers like yourself who don't know any better. No Israeli soldier is shooting children for "fun", or ever targeting civilians. In contrast, Palestinians terrorists actively target and deliberately kill innocent children.

And no one's land was stolen. Never was Arab land stolen by the Jewish immigrants- it was purchased legally, all along. The Arabs lost territory in a war of annihilation that they started and lost. Sorry, but I am not too sympathetic. It is worse to lose your life than to lose a house, especially if the land that you owned doesn't have any more significance to you than a temporary residence. And even if they go "way back", it is the fault of the Arab governments who were so disgusted by the thought of a Jewish country in their neighborhood that they would send 5 armies to try and kill every man, woman and child. Land was not stolen in the course of the war. Land was seized when it was a military necessity. Your choice of where your sympathy is going is extremely misguided and totally backwards from a moral perspective.
Unless your next post actually has you taking your own stance, and answering the dozens of valid points that I have brought up, I am through with this discussion. You are burying your head in the sand and tolerating the presence, and advocating the triumph, of hatred and evil in this world. It is because of people like you that this conflict is still going on, and that 7 year old girls are being targeted for death. Please stop before you embarass yourself any more, I don't think you realize what you are advocating, or what kind of people you are sympathizing with. But if you insist on ignoring the facts and the reality, then it is not my responsibility to argue with you. I question whether you are even reading what I post, since you have not had anything to say about the points I have brought up. Again, it is not enough to just show that there are other people who disagree with what I say, or even that there are Jews who disagree. The vast majority of Jews support the right of the State of Israel to exist in safety, and are disgusted by those who deny it's legitimacy and make apologetics for heartless mass murderers, as do I. Please stop dodging the issues and avoiding taking responsibility for your own position. For someone who woke up one day to how evil the Iraqi regime was, I'd like to think that you weren't beyond intellectual honesty regarding this conflict as well- but then again, there is always a double standard when it comes to Israel, or to Jews, throughout history. Good luck in finding a moral compass.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Sun Tzu

I posted the list of children because I interpret you posting an occasional statement such as "I know the Palestinians suffer" as what you deeme as political correctness. IMO if you didnt feel the need to be concerned with such formalities you wouldnt. No none of these children were human shields, it almost sounds as if thats how you would have wanted to happen.


The reason for the links and pictures I mainly wanted to expose this statement for what it is. Theres a few million Jews that will disagree with you. Take this argument to them if you feel the need to convince someone.

And as far as the difference between Zionists and Jews, ALL Jews who are religious in any way (and all Jews were until less than 150 years ago) are Zionists.


As far as what you percieve as your ongoing version of history: Ive seen your sources, they are not credable. If you makes you feel better to type it out go ahead Im no longer listening. Dont get discouraged, there will be another thread that someone sees the things you say and disagree and you can once again get on your pulpit until they catch on.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

crumbbum

Zi·on·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (z-nzm)
n.
A Jewish movement that arose in the late 19th century in response to growing anti-Semitism and sought to reestablish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Modern Zionism is concerned with the support and development of the state of Israel.

I think it's safe to assume that all Israelis would be considered Zionists- I assume they support the country they live in.

Also, with regard to Iraq- there was a great deal of protest against the Iraq war in this country. Almost half of Americans were against the war. Now, the number of Israelis who support the positions of the sites you've linked to is miniscule, less than 5%. Did the fact that so many Americans protested the war make it wrong? One had to examine the facts about the war, and about Saddam's regime before one could be sure that it was the right thing or not. The rightness of a position can only be derived by analyzing the position itself, and the question it intends to answer (in this case, how can there be peace in the Middle east without a second Holocaust?). In Nazi Germany the overwhelming majority of Germans LOVED Hitler, you should see the footage of the women crying at the parades and whatnot. Does this make Nazism correct? Of course not. Only a fool bases their position on important issues on public opinion- independent thought is necessary if a person is serious about right and wrong, and about truth in any matter. Independent thought means intellectual honesty and openness, and concern for the truth even if it is uncomfortable. You have repeatedly attacked the legitimacy of my position on this, which I came to after years of investigation. You have not considered the information I have presented. That is why if you continue to refuse to do so, and to answer the questions I raised previously, your position is invalid. If you think that the anti-Zionist Jews are right, if this is what YOU think, then back it up yourself! Articulate your own position! Answer my questions, if you can!

In the end, Sun-Tzu, I have a lot more sympathy for the thousands of innocent people that have been brutally murdered by PLO terrorists over the years (not just Jews) than for people who have to wait in line to cross to their jobs in Israel, or people who have curfews, etc. None of those things would exist if that murder had ever stopped- this endless wave of bloodlust has existed since long before Israel became a state. It existed before the settlements, it existed before the West bank of the Jordan and the Gaza Strip ever came under Israeli control. It existed before the State of Israel was declared. Jews have been being brutally murdered in that region simply for the "crime" of being alive and living there ever since they began to arrive, fleeing over a thousand years of murders, pogroms, expulsions, hatred, discrimination, persecution, and eventually a Holocaust that killed 6 million of the smallest minority in the world (1/3 of all Jews in the world were murdered). You simply don't understand the reality of this conflict.

Golda Meir once said that "There will be peace when that Arabs love their children more than they hate the Jews", and she was right. Peace could have been there from the beginning, and it could still happen tomorrow if only the Arab world could accept the right of Jews to live. I hope you realize that you are making excuses and defending people who would gleefully kill every Jewish man, woman, and child in Israel if they had the power. Did you know that Mein Kampf is a bestseller in the Arab world, and in the Palestinian territories? Are you surprised? By advocating more concessions from Israel, you are advocating giving the Arabs greater ability to kill Jews. That is the only reason they want the land. It is NOT a holy land to them. The only site of significance to them is the Mosque on the Temple Mount- which is protected and guarded under Israeli law, and which is open to pilgrimmages from Muslims the world over. Even the most bitter enemies of Israel are allowed to enter and worship freely. There is no excuse for murder Sun-Tzu, and I really think that if you have learned anything about history, you should know better.

It is also ironic that the Israeli far left has gotten a monopoly on the word "peace". All the sites you have linked to- the "center for middle east peace", "Peace now", etc.- it reminds me of a pretty famous statement by Neville Chamberlain after ceding Czechoslovakia to Hitler in an attempt to appease him. "I have just bought peace in our time", I believe is what he said (maybe not exact, "peace in our time" is the part I am sure about). He was wrong- it only emboldened Hitler to continue his aggression and started WW2. Don't think that the far left has any monopoly on peace. All of the Israeli political parties want peace- they just disagree about the best way to achieve it. They are, after all, dealing with a fanatical, homicidal enemy bent on their destruction (though many have a hard time understand such hatred, and think that it can be appeased by uprooting settlements and whatnot). "They must not understand that we REALLY want peace". It isn't a question of understanding. It is a question of intent.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

crumbbum

http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...yyed061803.asp

This is an article written by a Muslim who is of the more moderate variety. He was forced to flee Pakistan, from Islamic crazies that wanted to kill him. He understands the mindset of these people better than you or I. If you are honestly motivated by a desire for peace, then read this and THINK about it. I am tempted to ask you to paraphrase it just to make sure you at least understand what he is saying, what I have been saying. I would be interested to hear your comments.

__________________
Truth is peace. We are all souls in bodies.

Darkblack

Sun Tzu, brother I have read this entire thing. Just let it go. You will never get it through his head that Israel has done anything wrong. No matter what you post it will "prove absolutely nothing" in his mind.

Guns against rocks.

Tanks against suicide bombs.

Soldiers against kids.

He doesn't see a difference.

Thank you for educating me a bit on the subject and for being a champion for our side on this thread.