# Why I dont post here



## Charles_Main (Jul 11, 2008)

I am part jewish, and a dual citizen of both the US and Israel. I refrain from posting on Israel related issues because people will just assume bias.


----------



## editec (Jul 11, 2008)

What part of you is Jewish?

Clearly not your brain.


----------



## jillian (Jul 11, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I am part jewish, and a dual citizen of both the US and Israel. I refrain from posting on Israel related issues because people will just assume bias.



Bias as in preference? And??? So what?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 11, 2008)

lol way to toss around insults.

My mothers mother was full blooded hebrew. so that makes me 1/8 Jewish. Enough that Hitler would have killed me. however I was raised Christian.


But why am I talking to a petty insult artist anyways.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 11, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I am part jewish, and a dual citizen of both the US and Israel. I refrain from posting on Israel related issues because people will just assume bias.



Well that's pretty bigoted of you ! Give it a shot. Everyone is biased.


----------



## Annie (Jul 11, 2008)

I'm Irish Catholic. My ex is Russian Jew. My children are obviously mixed. All the more reason for me to stand up to antisemitism. If not now, when?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 11, 2008)

jillian said:


> Bias as in preference? And??? So what?



My point was any opinion I post on the Arab Israeli conflict will just be dismissed by many as the opinion of a Jew, even though I am an American, and Christian, and only Part Jewish by blood, and a dual citizen because my mother made me so when I was to young to even have a choice.

believe me when I say the Arab Israeli conflict has touched my life directly.


----------



## editec (Jul 11, 2008)

I am an American.

Wanna see my tatoo?


----------



## jillian (Jul 11, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> My point was any opinion I post on the Arab Israeli conflict will just be dismissed by many as the opinion of a Jew, even though I am an American, and Christian, and only Part Jewish by blood, and a dual citizen because my mother made me so when I was to young to even have a choice.
> 
> believe me when I say the Arab Israeli conflict has touched my life directly.



And my point was that I think you have an obligation to take stands on this issue. It's easy to stand quiet when you see people lying, misrepresenting and distorting.... but then no one is contradicting them and people who really are open-minded think they're telling the truth. And who cares if anyone thinks you have a bias. We all have preferences. I am biased toward city life, but that doesn't mean anyone would think I'm being untruthful or "biased" if I talk about a great restaurant; great park or whatever....


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 11, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> My point was any opinion I post on the Arab Israeli conflict will just be dismissed by many as the opinion of a Jew, even though I am an American, and Christian, and only Part Jewish by blood, and a dual citizen because my mother made me so when I was to young to even have a choice.
> 
> believe me when I say the Arab Israeli conflict has touched my life directly.



Well you got the victim part down pretty well. Get over it and post. Sheeesh !!


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 11, 2008)

You would have to had dealt with anti semitism and the rampant distrust of Jews to Understand. I hear it all the time. You guys stated all the wars, You guys killed christ, You guys are so cheap yada yada yada.

I am telling you I have had friends who when they found out I was part Jewish all of the sudden hated me. 

However I see your points, so I will post on issues that matter to me. Just please do not assume because I am part Jewish I automatically support everything Israel does, Nothing could be further from the truth. I do however support it's right to exsist, Which is more than I can say for a lot of people I come across.

Just the other day I argued with a guy in a game I play for an hour. He kept calling me a cheap Jew, and when I called him Racist he swore up and down it was not racist to assume all Jews are cheap. He said it was just a funny thing to say. Sterotyping whole races is Racist, no matter what anyone says. I am telling you IMO anti semitism is the only form of racism that is still acceptable in the US today.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 11, 2008)

this thread is going places.


----------



## roomy (Jul 12, 2008)

It seems to me that when Israel was given back to the Jews it was an exercise in salving conscience.Israels willingness to defend itself is testament to the courage of a people who are saying...No more fucking shit from you lot.For fucks sake who in their right mind would argue that Israel has no right to exist, if I was a Jew the antisemites amongst you would worry.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> You would have to had dealt with anti semitism and the rampant distrust of Jews to Understand. I hear it all the time. You guys stated all the wars, You guys killed christ, You guys are so cheap yada yada yada.
> 
> I am telling you I have had friends who when they found out I was part Jewish all of the sudden hated me.
> 
> ...



If this response is to Jillian, I think she feels your pain, dude.  You're doing the same thing you're saying others do ... assuming.

Maybe you ought to ask her if she is Jewish?


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I am part jewish, and a dual citizen of both the US and Israel. I refrain from posting on Israel related issues because people will just assume bias.



Do you think Israel or America are 100 percent innocent in the way we deal with Palistine or every other Arab country?  

I tend to agree with Israel, but I also try to see things from the other side.

The fact that the Jewish lobbyist group in America is the second largest, bigger than the gun lobbiests, proves the USA is bias to Israel.  

They set our foreign policy in the Middle East.

Liebermann shows bias.

But thank God Jewish Americans are even starting to doubt Bush strategy.

Imagine Europe put Greece in the grand canyon because they say it is or was their holy land.  How would the surrounding states and occupied Utahians take that.


----------



## roomy (Jul 12, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> Do you think Israel or America are 100 percent innocent in the way we deal with Palistine or every other Arab country?
> 
> I tend to agree with Israel, but I also try to see things from the other side.
> 
> ...




Hahhahahahahhahahaha.........you are funny...


----------



## jillian (Jul 12, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> Do you think Israel or America are 100 percent innocent in the way we deal with Palistine or every other Arab country?
> 
> I tend to agree with Israel, but I also try to see things from the other side.
> 
> ...



"they"??? riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.... 1.5% of the population of the country runs things.... suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure it does.... no bias in spreading racist stereotypes...nah... 

You are aware, aren't you, that trying to discredit groups that defend jews and defend Israel is in large part a continuation of the pro-palestinian propaganda that seems to have perverted a great deal of today's educational and political systems....

Tell me, are you whining about CAIR? Just wondering what the difference is between CAIR and AIPAC other than AIPAC doesn't support terrorist groups like Hamas.

Council on American-Islamic Relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Just wondering.... 

So, it seems we all have bias...and worst, I really can't stand Joe Lieberman any more, but when I read stuff like you just wrote, it makes me want to defend his indefensible support of Baby Bush's sick policies.... because ultimately, what he sees on our side of the aisle are people who perpetuate the types of racist stereotyping that you just did.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 12, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> Do you think Israel or America are 100 percent innocent in the way we deal with Palistine or every other Arab country?
> 
> I tend to agree with Israel, but I also try to see things from the other side.
> 
> ...



If you had read any of my posts on the issue would not have to ask me if I think either side is 100% innocent.

I believe I used the words. "neither side are saints or Devils in that conflict"

Your grand canyon analogy is screwed because the Jews, have lived on that land for over 6000 years. They have been forced to leave, and returned, but they do have a historical connection, Unlike Greece and the Grand canyon.

Funny logic if you ask me.


----------



## jillian (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> If you had read any of my posts on the issue would not have to ask me if I think either side is 100% innocent.
> 
> I believe I used the words. "neither side are saints or Devils in that conflict"
> 
> ...



I figure the palestinians have as much right to go back to Israel as I have to go back to Belarus....


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 12, 2008)

The worst part of the whole right of return argument is that they want the right for not only those who left to return, but their families and decendents. If they were allowed the Jews in Israel would end up a very small minority in that land, and then you would see Genocide on a scale not seen since WWII. In the area anyways.


----------



## jillian (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> The worst part of the whole right of return argument is that they want the right for not only those who left to return, but their families and decendents. If they were allowed the Jews in Israel would end up a very small minority in that land, and then you would see Genocide on a scale not seen since WWII. In the area anyways.



Not to mention that there are plenty of Islamic countries where I can't even set foot..... notice how people only yell racism about the Jewish State.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 12, 2008)

jillian said:


> Not to mention that there are plenty of Islamic countries where I can't even set foot..... notice how people only yell racism about the Jewish State.



Yep,

I also noticed how at one point Israel actually offered to return the west bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt, and Both refused. It seemed they didn't want to deal with the Palestinians either.

I know I will catch flak for this, but in reality the Palestinians are Nothing but Jordanians and Egyptians. It was not until the Birth of Israel that people began calling them Palestinians.


----------



## roomy (Jul 12, 2008)

Since time immemorial might is right.We Brits wrote a lot of history and we say the Jews can have Israel.If it was left up to me they could have a whole lot fucking more of the desert, push all those muslim fuckers into Asia

Seriously though folks, who in their right mind begrudges them sovereign land?

Any palestinian terrorists here? Thought not.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 12, 2008)

Sure it was the UK in the beginning, but since then the UN has been the one who made the  Israel legitimate. Even when it was the UK they were acting under a league of Nations mandate. The US recognized Israel, At the 1967 borders anyways. Kinda of Ironic since the UN IMO has no become nothing but a tool for Anti Israeli and Anti American Propagandists.


----------



## roomy (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Sure it was the UK in the beginning, but since then the UN has been the one who made the  Israel legitimate. Even when it was the UK they were acting under a league of Nations mandate. The US recognized Israel, At the 1967 borders anyways. Kinda of Ironic since the UN IMO has no become nothing but a tool for Anti Israeli and Anti American Propagandists.



Not the UK though, we are in the UN but you are right, the UN are arseholes.

Had I been Jewish The world would owe me big time.Had I been Black, native American, Aborigine, Tasmanian, South American etc, etc the world would owe me big time.Those taking the high road should just learn to shut the fuck up, the Romans, French, Danes and others fucked Britain for centuries, we got over it by kicking their fucking arses back to shitsville, it's what we do, you small town Americans haven't got a clue.Let the Jews be, they have a country, they defend it, they have allies to help them do this.If you don't like it, lump it.You haven't got a moral leg to stand on, given how you live where you do.


----------



## jillian (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Yep,
> 
> I also noticed how at one point Israel actually offered to return the west bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt, and Both refused. It seemed they didn't want to deal with the Palestinians either.
> 
> I know I will catch flak for this, but in reality the Palestinians are Nothing but Jordanians and Egyptians. It was not until the Birth of Israel that people began calling them Palestinians.



Israel also asked their Arab Israeli citizens, who professed loyalty to the palestinians if they would like the lines redrawn to put them in palestinian territory and they said... "hell no".


----------



## editec (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> You would have to had dealt with anti semitism and the rampant distrust of Jews to Understand. I hear it all the time. You guys stated all the wars, You guys killed christ, You guys are so cheap yada yada yada.


 
You hear that all the time, do you? Amazing. Where do you live? On a NAZI compound in Idaho?



> I am telling you I have had friends who when they found out I was part Jewish all of the sudden hated me.


 
They were never your friends. Friendship supercedes ideology. 



> However I see your points, so I will post on issues that matter to me. Just please do not assume because I am part Jewish I automatically support everything Israel does, Nothing could be further from the truth. I do however support it's right to exsist, Which is more than I can say for a lot of people I come across.


 
How about if everyone simply assumed that the words others write are the words that express their opinions, and they stop filling in the gaps in their knowledge about the other's opinions with some caracture? 

Radical idea, I know, but it works for me.



> Just the other day I argued with a guy in a game I play for an hour. He kept calling me a cheap Jew, and when I called him Racist he swore up and down it was not racist to assume all Jews are cheap. He said it was just a funny thing to say. Sterotyping whole races is Racist, no matter what anyone says. I am telling you IMO anti semitism is the only form of racism that is still acceptable in the US today.


 
Yeah, you definitely must live in some sort of Klanner Klaven or something.

My advise is you start hanging out with people not weaing Jackboots for a while.

Your whole perspective might change.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 12, 2008)

editec said:


> You hear that all the time, do you? Amazing. Where do you live? On a NAZI compound in Idaho?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




LOL bud it was hardly an isolated incident. I suggest you try playing any on line under the name American Israeli. I am sure your perspective will change. The Racial comments are almost non stop, and do not seem to get people kicked or banned, Like using the N word would.


----------



## Paulie (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> My point was any opinion I post on the Arab Israeli conflict will just be dismissed by many as the opinion of a Jew, even though I am an American, and Christian, and only Part Jewish by blood, and a dual citizen because my mother made me so when I was to young to even have a choice.
> 
> believe me when I say the Arab Israeli conflict has touched my life directly.



No one would ever have known you were part jewish if you didn't make it public, and therefore would never have had reason to question your motive.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 12, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> Do you think Israel or America are 100 percent innocent in the way we deal with Palistine or every other Arab country?
> 
> I tend to agree with Israel, but I also try to see things from the other side.
> 
> ...



What a shock.  Sealybobo's a complete artard on yet another topic.  Are you educated on ANY subject at all?

Our dependence on oil dictates our policy in the Middle East.  The fact that against all odds, the underdog -- a fledgling Israel -- knocked the living shit out of the combined Arab nations brought the US to Israel's cause.  The US originally opposed the partition of Palestine.

A fact later generations seem to have forgotten just as they forgot what a murdering scumbag Yassir Arafat was and awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize, taking away any meaning or value from the award.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 12, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> No one would ever have known you were part jewish if you didn't make it public, and therefore would never have had reason to question your motive.



So I should hide who I am to avoid the racism I speak of? 

Please


----------



## Paulie (Jul 12, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> So I should hide who I am to avoid the racism I speak of?
> 
> Please



Well, you made it publicly known that you weren't going to discuss Israeli/Palestinian matters because you were jewish, when no one was asking why you weren't discussing it in the first place.

And then you proceeded to discuss it anyway.


----------



## Annie (Jul 12, 2008)

roomy said:


> Not the UK though, we are in the UN but you are right, the UN are arseholes.
> 
> Had I been Jewish The world would owe me big time.Had I been Black, native American, Aborigine, Tasmanian, South American etc, etc the world would owe me big time.Those taking the high road should just learn to shut the fuck up, the Romans, French, Danes and others fucked Britain for centuries, we got over it by kicking their fucking arses back to shitsville, it's what we do, you small town Americans haven't got a clue.Let the Jews be, they have a country, they defend it, they have allies to help them do this.If you don't like it, lump it.You haven't got a moral leg to stand on, given how you live where you do.



Damn Roomy, what about the Irish?


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 12, 2008)

roomy said:


> Hahhahahahahhahahaha.........you are funny...



And when did the Palistinians give back Israel to the Jews? 

someone said "when israel was "given back"....

was it or was it taken back?

I guess it depends on who you ask.  

so you are too bias to even entertain my questions?

If this is too sensitive of a topic for you I understand.  I just try to see both sides, as a non muslim and non jew.  sorry.


----------



## editec (Jul 13, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> LOL bud it was hardly an isolated incident. I suggest you try playing any on line under the name American Israeli. I am sure your perspective will change. The Racial comments are almost non stop, and do not seem to get people kicked or banned, Like using the N word would.


 
I must admit I am rather shocked by the general tolerance of the level of overt racism I find on this board.

Given that tolerance, it is fairly easy to understand why that racism (much of it obviously anti-Jewish) evokes paranoia from those here who indentify with their Jewish roots and think of Israel as their second homeland.
. 

NAZI trolls are not representative of the White race's attitude about Jews.

Naturally I do grow weary of being labeled anti-Semetic for questioning the validity of American policies regards Israel.

I'm an American and I put American interests far ahead of an concern I have for the State of Israel.

That does not make me an anti-Semite, but that DOES make the person who so easily labels me somewhat anti-American.

I will not be bullied by such transparently dishonest  tactics from partisans of any race, religion or philosophy.


----------



## jillian (Jul 13, 2008)

*yawn*.... like you're the only one who puts this country before Israel. If I were more concerned with Israel than I am with this country, I'd vote for McCain in November....

I'm sorry if you don't *get* that calling zionism racism is anti-semitic.

The British Mandate was officially divided by the United Nations in 1948. That makes the Jewish State legal. There is nothing RACIST about that.

When people who pretend to be honest brokers call Israel racist but are ok with the (how many?) muslim states that either oppress their religious minorities or would keep me from setting foot on their soil, then they are being disingenuous.... no matter what they *think* their reasons are.

You are right though, there is a bit of overt racism on this board...against blacks, against Jews and against Mexicans...and,yes, against Arabs. 

But I thikn if you look at the posts, most of it is anti-semitic. It's just the people posting (other than WJ who is totally honest about what he is) pretend they have only fairness at heart.


----------



## editec (Jul 13, 2008)

> I'm sorry if you don't *get* that calling zionism racism is anti-semitic.


 
No you're not.

You're thrilled.

Because this vile insinuation of racism you hurl at anyone remotely interested in the facts, and who won't sign onto your party line, gives you the chance to be pretend that you're slaying racist dragons, and still delude yourself that you have some higher moral authority to insult people that you imagine (don't you?) are gentiles.

And you're clinging to the notion that Zionism is fundamentally different that White Supremicism is exactly the ammunition overt racists need to spead their vile philosophy of anti-Semitism and White Supremicism.

This is exactly why I say that hate mongering Jews and hate mongering White Supremecists need each other.

They reinforce each other's  paranoic vision of the other..

And if they can't find anyone who actually is the specific kind racist they fear, they'll simply invent them by mischaracterizing their views,  which is what you attempted to do to me.


----------



## Paulie (Jul 13, 2008)

jillian said:


> *yawn*.... like you're the only one who puts this country before Israel. If I were more concerned with Israel than I am with this country, I'd vote for McCain in November....
> 
> I'm sorry if you don't *get* that calling zionism racism is anti-semitic.
> 
> ...



Pretend to have fairness at heart?  But who are you to say what everyone else's motive is in their position on Israel policy?

How is it fair then, for you to automatically assume that any view on US policy regarding Israel that isn't in line with yours, is racism?

You're basically saying that.  I personally don't agree with the hypocrisy of our policy of foreign aid, wherein we give money to Israel, and then give money to its supposed enemies.  Where I would say that we just shouldn't fund ANY of them, you would say that's anti-semitism, without even knowing me personally.

I believe that to be because you see anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly support the interests of Israel as being an anti-semite.  

There's also the matter of there being nowhere in the constitution stating the Federal government has any authority to fund foreign countries.  But of course, that's an entirely different discussion, which I wouldn't mind having if there was a current thread on it.


----------



## roomy (Jul 13, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> And when did the Palistinians give back Israel to the Jews?
> 
> someone said "when israel was "given back"....
> 
> ...




We took the land from the smelly thieving bastards and gave it to the Jews.Blame the UK, we are used to it


----------



## Toro (Jul 13, 2008)

I hear ya bro.

I'm part Canadian.  You can't believe the discrimination I've felt...


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 13, 2008)

What is racist and Ignorant is assuming all Israelis are bent on killing Palestinians and Taking more land. In truth Israel is a pretty liberal nation, where a large portion of the population disagrees with their government on many levels. There is not blanket support of the far right in Israel, not by a long shot. In fact Israel and Jews here usually support the Democrat candidate for president here. Israeli courts often over turn actions of the government. It is basically a lot like our system here. Even the 1 million Arab Israelis are allowed to vote.

Does that mean there is not racism against them there, of course not, but ask yourself this. would Jews be given the same rights in a Muslim Nations as Arabs are giving in Israel? I highly doubt it. 

I have long thought that if The arabs threw down their arms and begged for peace with Israel, there would be peace. While if Israel did the same, there would be another holocaust. IMO Israel has bent over backwards for peace in modern history and each time they have been rewarded with more attacks, and hate.

Now I did say this was my opinion, I never claim to always be right, and clearly Israel has done horrible things, just as the Palestinians have. However I feel over all Israel, at least lately has been far more willing to make peace than the Palestinians and their Arab nation allies.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 13, 2008)

roomy said:


> Not the UK though, we are in the UN but you are right, the UN are arseholes.
> 
> Had I been Jewish The world would owe me big time.Had I been Black, native American, Aborigine, Tasmanian, South American etc, etc the world would owe me big time.Those taking the high road should just learn to shut the fuck up, the Romans, French, Danes and others fucked Britain for centuries, we got over it by kicking their fucking arses back to shitsville, it's what we do, you small town Americans haven't got a clue.Let the Jews be, they have a country, they defend it, they have allies to help them do this.If you don't like it, lump it.You haven't got a moral leg to stand on, given how you live where you do.




You forgot the Jutes.  Everyone forgets the Jutes.  

The Romans left voluntarily, the Normans took over after an invasion.

But you still forgot the Jutes....


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 13, 2008)

Kathianne said:


> Damn Roomy, what about the Irish?



The Normans started the trouble in Ireland.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 13, 2008)

Toro said:


> I hear ya bro.
> 
> I'm part Canadian.  You can't believe the discrimination I've felt...



If yer a Leafs fan I feel your pain


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 13, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> What is racist and Ignorant is assuming all Israelis are bent on killing Palestinians and Taking more land. In truth Israel is a pretty liberal nation, where a large portion of the population disagrees with their government on many levels. There is not blanket support of the far right in Israel, not by a long shot. In fact Israel and Jews here usually support the Democrat candidate for president here. Israeli courts often over turn actions of the government. It is basically a lot like our system here. Even the 1 million Arab Israelis are allowed to vote.
> 
> ..........



From the little I know about Israeli politics - yes, it's very complex and there are a lot of policy positions.  As far as I understand it there's no single position on the relationship with Arab states and the Palestinians.  But we like to simplify it I suppose.


----------



## jillian (Jul 13, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> Pretend to have fairness at heart?  But who are you to say what everyone else's motive is in their position on Israel policy?



I care about your intended reasult.... res ipsa...



> How is it fair then, for you to automatically assume that any view on US policy regarding Israel that isn't in line with yours, is racism?



You're mischaracterizing. Did I say *any* disagreement or did I specifically refer to calling zionism "racism"?



> You're basically saying that.  I personally don't agree with the hypocrisy of our policy of foreign aid, wherein we give money to Israel, and then give money to its supposed enemies.  Where I would say that we just shouldn't fund ANY of them, you would say that's anti-semitism, without even knowing me personally.



I didn't say that made you an anti-semite. I said that anyone who calls zionism racism is an anti-semite, but they're hiding behind professed "fairness".



> I believe that to be because you see anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly support the interests of Israel as being an anti-semite.



The issue is far more subtle...but I'm not going to allow anyone to spread palestinian propaganda if I can help it..... particularly when their end result would be jews living under the thumbs of people who say openly they want them dead.

That shouldn't be particularly difficult to understand.



> There's also the matter of there being nowhere in the constitution stating the Federal government has any authority to fund foreign countries.  But of course, that's an entirely different discussion, which I wouldn't mind having if there was a current thread on it.



I'd say there's pretty good precedent for foreign aid going back to the French Revolution, no?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> It seems to me that when Israel was given back to the Jews it was an exercise in salving conscience.Israels willingness to defend itself is testament to the courage of a people who are saying...No more fucking shit from you lot.For fucks sake who in their right mind would argue that Israel has no right to exist, if I was a Jew the antisemites amongst you would worry.



Israel was a place we learned about in Sunday school.   Modern 'Israel' is a ghetto-colony, established largely because the US didn't want to take on too many suffering 'Jews' (as defined by Hitler).   The people of Palestine had done nothing to 'the Jews', but were murdered and driven out anyway, and the children of those they can get at are now regularly shot by zionist terrorists, to frighten their parents off the patriotic leaders they favour.   I delight in Jewish company but understand full well that the zionist perversion is merely the nearest some very frightened people can now get to nazism - and it stinks to high heaven!   It is a pity that so many Americans know so very little about what is being DONE to the native people of that racist colony, or about the McCarthyite power of AIPAC.


----------



## jillian (Jul 15, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Israel was a place we learned about in Sunday school.   Modern 'Israel' is a ghetto-colony, established largely because the US didn't want to take on too many suffering 'Jews' (as defined by Hitler).   The people of Palestine had done nothing to 'the Jews', but were murdered and driven out anyway, and the children of those they can get at are now regularly shot by zionist terrorists, to frighten their parents off the patriotic leaders they favour.   I delight in Jewish company but understand full well that the zionist perversion is merely the nearest some very frightened people can now get to nazism - and it stinks to high heaven!   It is a pity that so many Americans know so very little about what is being DONE to the native people of that racist colony, or about the McCarthyite power of AIPAC.



You don't have a clue what you're talking about....but keep repeating the same anti-semetic crap.

Nice that "some of your best friends are...."


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

A very biased and simplistic viewpoint, if you ask me.


----------



## jillian (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> A very biased and simplistic viewpoint, if you ask me.



pretty much my feeling on the subject....


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

well THAT didn't take long... funny how no one cares to refute points while the ole Scarlet A works just as well...

:yawn:


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> well THAT didn't take long... funny how no one cares to refute points while the ole Scarlet A works just as well...
> 
> :yawn:



You could always give it a whirl, you like to see yourself talk


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

what... and give you another reason to avoid the issue by calling me an antisemite?

I could have set my watch by the standard zionist knee jerk response.  That you'd call anyone a racist is beyond ironic.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> what... and give you another reason to avoid the issue by calling me an antisemite?
> 
> I could have set my watch by the standard zionist knee jerk response.  That you'd call anyone a racist is beyond ironic.




There you go again, it must be great being you.Give me the winning numbers for next weeks lottery please.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

as if you've not made your reaction perfectly clear in threads past, dude.


and yes, being me is quite nice.


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I am part jewish, and a dual citizen of both the US and Israel. I refrain from posting on Israel related issues because people will just assume bias.



Yeah, I don't post here either but not for the same reason.  I wouldn't want people to get confused by the fact that I fully support the state of Israel and US foreign policy in that regard but at the same time have the unmitigated gall to tell jokes about Jews having big noses.


----------



## editec (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> What is racist and Ignorant is assuming all Israelis are bent on killing Palestinians and Taking more land. In truth Israel is a pretty liberal nation, where a large portion of the population disagrees with their government on many levels. There is not blanket support of the far right in Israel, not by a long shot. In fact Israel and Jews here usually support the Democrat candidate for president here. Israeli courts often over turn actions of the government. It is basically a lot like our system here. Even the 1 million Arab Israelis are allowed to vote.
> 
> Does that mean there is not racism against them there, of course not, but ask yourself this. would Jews be given the same rights in a Muslim Nations as Arabs are giving in Israel? I highly doubt it.
> 
> ...


 
I think that's a pretty fair assessment of the state of affairs.

It's far from complete, and it does pose the Arabs as a monlithic group of heartless monsters, but it's essantially honest as far as it goes.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> as if you've not made your reaction perfectly clear in threads past, dude.
> 
> 
> and yes, being me is quite nice.



You sound scared of me?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

I wonder how many guffaws of laughter Lebenon would take at THAT joke.


cluster bomb in a civilian population anyone?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> You sound scared of me?



im scared of your snaggle tooth mouf, dude.  Please, stop smiling until you can invest in a toothbrush.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> im scared of your snaggle tooth mouf, dude.  Please, stop smiling until you can invest in a toothbrush.



Just debate the topic instead of trying to derail it or shut the fuck up and leave it alone


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

that post is ironic as fuck considering your rebuttal to Rhys...  But, like cavity prevention, you probably missed that boat entirely.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Did you know that Saudi Arabia was not created until 1913, Lebanon until 1920? Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932, Syria until 1941. The borders of Jordan were established in 1946 and Kuwait in 1961. Any of these nations that would say Israel is only a recent arrival would have to deny their own rights as recent arrivals as well. They did not exist as countries. They were all under the control of the Turks.


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Did you know that Saudi Arabia was not created until 1913, Lebanon until 1920? Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932, Syria until 1941. The borders of Jordan were established in 1946 and Kuwait in 1961. Any of these nations that would say Israel is only a recent arrival would have to deny their own rights as recent arrivals as well. They did not exist as countries. They were all under the control of the Turks.




Not to mention that with Jews all you have to worry about is them convincing you to drop $11 on a shitty movie or making money off your mortgage interest.  But the Muslims might actually try to kill you.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

clearly, british mandates on land declarations in the mid east makes the muslims living there disappear!  Kinda like how a lack of a written language and no shoes makes American native simply not count!

The FACT of Europe flaking off it's jewish population to israel doesn't minimize the FACT of a population that is nnow marginalized depite lofty british consideration.  


You learned the same lesson in South Afrika, bukko.


The difference being, we have an easier time empathizing with Nelson Mandelah's "terrorism" than we do those who the bible treats like OT canaanites.


shocker.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Jews have been present in the region for 3000 years, longer than anyone else by far, historically it is their land.

God promise them this land, so biblically it is their land.

We won the war, we governed the area and honoured our promise to the Jews.

Something for you to be getting on with Shogun


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> Not to mention that with Jews all you have to worry about is them convincing you to drop $11 on a shitty movie or making money off your mortgage interest.  But the Muslims might actually try to kill you.



tell that joke to a civilian living in Lebennon circa 2006.


IDF admits targeting civilian areas in Lebanon with cluster bombs
IDF admits targeting civilian areas in Lebanon with cluster bombs - Haaretz - Israel News

"This is a very serious matter," MK Cohen said. "If cluster bombs were used in populated areas, this constitutes an indescribable crime. There is no target that cannot be hit without cluster bombs. The massive use by the IDF of cluster bombs during the war suggests an absolute loss of control and hysteria."


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> tell that joke to a civilian living in Lebennon circa 2006.



Don't care.  In the real world, which this place certainly IS NOT, quite often you have to pick a side.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Jews have been present in the region for 3000 years, longer than anyone else by far, historically it is their land.
> 
> *God promise them this land, so biblically it is their land.*
> 
> ...






oh yes.. the world abides by the burning bush realty service.

indeed, Germany won IT'S war against european countries too.  So what does that validate?

feel free to tell me just how valid is some goofy fucking metaphysical claim is, dude.  It's not like muslims don't ALSO have just as much of a history there.  Go read the OT and tell me another joke lampooning 72 virgins.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 15, 2008)

When did Germany win a war in europe?

WWI? WWII?

hmmmmm


----------



## Ravi (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> tell that joke to a civilian living in Lebennon circa 2006.



I didn't think that was a joke.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> Don't care.  In the real world, which this place certainly IS NOT, quite often you have to pick a side.



of course you don't care.  Germans didn't care for jews either.  Feel free to talk about merely picking a side instead of doing what is right for humans DESPITE an ethnic premium on hebrew culture.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> When did Germany win a war in europe?
> 
> WWI? WWII?
> 
> hmmmmm



It won it's wars with every nation on the Euro continent during both world wars.  Praytel, what does this map validate to you?








Do you see that big GIANT fucking hole of nazi germany smack dab where poland and other nations had been located?


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Feel free to talk about merely picking a side instead of doing what is right for humans DESPITE an ethnic premium on hebrew culture.



Great, I get lectured about doing right for humans by the guy that wants to allow rapists to have a say in whether their victims are allow to have an abortion.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I didn't think that was a joke.



certainly a civilian torn apart by an isreali cluster bomb wouldn't laugh at it.. unless they were just told that the only thing they had to fear from peaceful, fair israelis was, how did mani put it, lowering a price?


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> When did Germany win a war in europe?
> 
> WWI? WWII?
> 
> hmmmmm



In shoguns head He doesn't have a clue what he is debating, he hasn't made an argument yet.I won't hold my breath.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> Great, I get lectured about doing right for humans by the guy that wants to allow rapists to have a say in whether their victims are allow to have an abortion.



RAPISTS?


men are RAPISTS now, eh?

thats a cute strawman, dude.  I see that my massive Intelligence still intimidates you.  I wonder if you will run strait to the flame forum to post a goofy poll now.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> certainly a civilian torn apart by an isreali cluster bomb wouldn't laugh at it.. unless they were just told that the only thing they had to fear from peaceful, fair israelis was, how did mani put it, lowering a price?



The thing is, Shog, YOU are always dogging on Jews and I've never seen you post anything but hero worship about Arabs. You are certainly entitled to do that, but it sure makes your motives suspect.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> In shoguns head He doesn't have a clue what he is debating, he hasn't made an argument yet.I won't hold my breath.



ahh demonizing instead of rebuttal.

THATS so RARE from knee jerk zionist enablers!


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun gets mad when somebody dares to misrepresent what he posted.  That's some deep fucking irony for you right there!


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> It won it's wars with every nation on the Euro continent during both world wars.  Praytel, what does this map validate to you?
> 
> 
> 
> ...






Stop please I may die laughing


----------



## Ravi (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> RAPISTS?
> 
> 
> men are RAPISTS now, eh?
> ...



Wow, that was hysterically funny.


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Soggy is like that shithead we all work with that can give you sixteen reasons why your solution to a problem won't work, but never has any alternatives to offer.  Probably works in Human Resources or something.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> It won it's wars with every nation on the Euro continent during both world wars.  Praytel, what does this map validate to you?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Did you see what happened after 1942? Little thing where Germany got its ass handed to them, and ended up divided for a good many years?

YOU call that a victory eh. Interesting logic. Going by that logic I guess we won the war In Iraq in 03 eh.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

So shogun says, Israel shouldn't exist because Germany won the war I am still laughing


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

Ravi said:


> The thing is, Shog, YOU are always dogging on Jews and I've never seen you post anything but hero worship about Arabs. You are certainly entitled to do that, but it sure makes your motives suspect.



bullshit.  Ask roomy about that Theo Van Gogh reference he missed the other day...


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> So shogun says, Israel shouldn't exist because Germany won the war I am still laughing



Not bad for sure.  But still pales in comparison to his half-pregnancy compromise.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> So shogun says, Israel shouldn't exist because Germany won the war I am still laughing



thats an awfully rookie attempt to mischaracterize what iv'e said.  But, whats new...


You defend the idea that winning a war authorizes you to do whatever you want with the indigenous population.  Well, as long as you are not reminded of Germany, that is.  

Face it.  You are nothing more than a shill allowing the new boss to act exactly like the old boss.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> Not bad for sure.  But still pales in comparison to his half-pregnancy compromise.



dont blame me if ravi keeps her arm up your ass up to her elbow, dude.  Again, avoiding the issue via demonization sure isn't laughably typical from knee jerk zionist enablers, is it?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> thats an awfully rookie attempt to mischaracterize what iv'e said.  But, whats new...
> 
> 
> You defend the idea that winning a war authorizes you to do whatever you want with the indigenous population.  Well, as long as you are not reminded of Germany, that is.
> ...




So you still believe Germany won the war eh. Interesting.

Since you like maps here is one you might want to look at


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> Shogun gets mad when somebody dares to misrepresent what he posted.  That's some deep fucking irony for you right there!



Is it?  I guess you'd better run to the flame zone and post a poll!


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

You'd like that wouldn't you.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> thats an awfully rookie attempt to mischaracterize what iv'e said.  But, whats new...
> 
> 
> You defend the idea that winning a war authorizes you to do whatever you want with the indigenous population.  Well, as long as you are not reminded of Germany, that is.
> ...




By your logic, Germany has won the war and murdered every jew in the world therefore Israel doesn't exist...in your dreams pal

Grow up Shog, you have no real argument against Israel other than personal feelings but continue to flail your arms around in a desperate attempt to hit something.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Stop please I may die laughing



certainly, you wont die of making a worthwhile rebuttal, eh?


Again, if YOU can insist that it's your conquerers right to disregard an indegenous population that I guess you feel the same way about Germany's domination of Europe..


WHAT!?!?!?!


consistency isn't as fun as calling someone an antisemite, you say?  


again, you are transparent from a mile away just as I suggested following your standard response to Rhys.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> By your logic, Germany has won the war and murdered every jew in the world therefore Israel doesn't exist...in your dreams pal
> 
> Grow up Shog, you have no real argument against Israel other than personal feelings but continue to flail your arms around in a desperate attempt to hit something.



No, by MY logical consistent application of your goofy excuses for israel, Germany had the same right to do with its conquered populations that you allow israel to do to theirs.


If you can't follow your own statements then just say so, dude.  Insinuating that i hate jews is a tired ass trick pony that may sell at the temple but really isn't all that impressive out here in the real world.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> certainly, you wont die of making a worthwhile rebuttal, eh?
> 
> 
> Again, if YOU can insist that it's your conquerers right to disregard an indegenous population that I guess you feel the same way about Germany's domination of Europe..
> ...




So you agree with me then, Israel does have the right to exist?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> You'd like that wouldn't you.



it would probably impress me just as much as it did the last time i had you running ther with your tail between your legs just a waiting for ravi to come pos rep you into high spirits..


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> So you agree with me then, Israel does have the right to exist?



Both populations have a right to exist.  You typical banter hopes to ignore the fact that I've ALWAYS made it a point to insist that both jews and pals share the land in a single state solution that isn't based on an ethnic standard either way.


As it is, you really are nothing more than a nazi with a slightly different application of master race.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> No, by MY logical consistent application of your goofy excuses for israel, Germany had the same right to do with its conquered populations that you allow israel to do to theirs.
> 
> 
> If you can't follow your own statements then just say so, dude.  Insinuating that i hate jews is a tired ass trick pony that may sell at the temple but really isn't all that impressive out here in the real world.




Heres another little lesson for you shogun, history this time.Germany were doing exactly as they wanted before we fucked them up.I am sure you can research WWII if you hit the keys and press enter.Anything else you are confused about?


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Both populations have a right to exist.  You typical banter hopes to ignore the fact that I've ALWAYS made it a point to insist that both jews and pals share the land in a single state solution that isn't based on an ethnic standard either way.
> 
> 
> As it is, you really are nothing more than a nazi with a slightly different application of master race.




The Arabs turned that offer down dummy.


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Soggy said:
			
		

> *consistency* isn't as fun as...



       

That's rich!  Talk of consistency from the least consistent guy to ever sully the good reputation of this fine messageboard.

- Supports the right to bear arms in the US, but doesn't believe Israel should be allowed to defend itself.

- Invokes the 9th Amendment when railing against smoking bans but doesn't think it applies to a woman's right to choose.

- Supports socialism AND lower taxes (fantasyland rules!)

And that's just off the top of my head.


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Soggy said:
			
		

> ...out here in the real world.



Poor delusional bastard!


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Soggy said:
			
		

> it would probably impress me just as much as it did the last time i had you running ther with your tail between your legs just a waiting for ravi to come pos rep you into high spirits..



So you're saying you'd bitch to the mods again?

Doesn't surprise me.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> So you're saying you'd bitch to the mods again?
> 
> Doesn't surprise me.




Does he do that?


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

A pretty wuss thing to do don't you think?  Especially for someone who likes to dish it out so much.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> A pretty wuss thing to do don't you think?  Especially for someone who likes to dish it out so much.



I am surprised, I didn't think he would stoop so low.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Heres another little lesson for you shogun, history this time.Germany were doing exactly as they wanted before we fucked them up.I am sure you can research WWII if you hit the keys and press enter.Anything else you are confused about?



before YOU fucked them up?  bitch, please.  Were it not for the US your candy ass would be speaking german now.  And yes, they WERE doing what they wanted because, apparently, THEY had the same "we conquered and can do what we want" opinion as you do.


Feel free to google flouride while you are busy with this half assed lecture circuit you think you are on.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> The Arabs turned that offer down dummy.




yea.. after being kicked the hell out of their land during the creation of israel.  Do I need to bitchslap you with Olmert quotes about his avoidance of a single state solution?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> That's rich!  Talk of consistency from the least consistent guy to ever sully the good reputation of this fine messageboard.
> - Supports the right to bear arms in the US, but doesn't believe Israel should be allowed to defend itself.
> - Invokes the 9th Amendment when railing against smoking bans but doesn't think it applies to a woman's right to choose.
> - Supports socialism AND lower taxes (fantasyland rules!)
> And that's just off the top of my head.




Indeed, the US CONSTITUTIONAL right to bare arms isn't a free for all for your dogma junky messiah jonez.

The ninth doesn't allow you to kill toddlers either.

There is a middle ground that doesn't require a bloated government.  I guess you've missed every time i've made it clear that i'd tax the fuck out of jobs moved offshore.. indeed, your selective memory is about as profound as those marionette strings Ravi makes you dance with.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> Poor delusional bastard!



says the guy rationalizing the same thing Aryans in Germany did...


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> So you're saying you'd bitch to the mods again?
> 
> Doesn't surprise me.



You can ask gunny or Jillian how funny that statement is, dude.  Yes, even Jillian who is eternally opposed to me on this issue.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Does he do that?



feel free to ask a mod.  They should have a good ole chuckle at the very thought of such.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> yea.. after being kicked the hell out of their land during the creation of israel.  Do I need to bitchslap you with Olmert quotes about his avoidance of a single state solution?




Oh... but you are an advocate of a single state, you just said so, so why would you now oppose it? Unless of course it is because I gave proof to the fact that you are an idiot?Post away you dumb shmuck, you make me laugh, as long as you pass me the ammo I will shoot you with it dumbo.

Fucking, thick, idiot, bastard antisemite.Now you can say "I told you so", just remember you called me a nazi first before you start blubbing to the mods


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

*He has, but nobody compares with RGS in that regard.*


you are a fucking liar and you know it.


whats more, the mods know it.  Feel free to PM any of them and ask.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Oh... but you are an advocate of a single state, you just said so, so why would you now oppose it? Unless of course it is because I gave proof to the fact that you are an idiot?Post away you dumb shmuck, you make me laugh, as long as you pass me the ammo I will shoot you with it dumbo.
> 
> Fucking, thick, idiot, bastard antisemite.Now you can say "I told you so", just remember you called me a nazi first before you start blubbing to the mods



yes, UNLIKE OLMERT AND EVERY ZIONIST JEW YOU ARE QUICK TO HAND A BLANK CHECK TO, I am for a SINGLE STATE solution.  Im not opposing a SINGLE STATE SOLUTION.  Helloooo.  Can you HEAR me now?


You gave PROOF?  HAHAHAHA!

when did that happen?  feel free to quote yourself or provide a post number, dude!  hey, shit talking and demonizing sure is a NEW routine for a logically defeated zionist enabler, isn't it?




You ARE a fucking nazi when you rationalize the same thing those master (chosen) race Aryans did.  Don't blame me if you are too stupid to see how your own statements mimic their excuses post invasions..


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

All I'm saying is that I support Israel's right to exist.  Period.

You don't need my permission to twist that into some retarded stretch about me being a Nazi just like you don't need my permission to cry to the mods after being bitch slapped.  It's just what you do.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> yes, UNLIKE OLMERT AND EVERY ZIONIST JEW YOU ARE QUICK TO HAND A BLANK CHECK TO, I am for a SINGLE STATE solution.  Im not opposing a SINGLE STATE SOLUTION.  Helloooo.  Can you HEAR me now?
> 
> 
> You gave PROOF?  HAHAHAHA!
> ...



We were being benevolent, there is a difference.The place was a shithole that nobody wanted except the Jews, we handed it over the day before our tenure was up.The Arabs then decided they would attack the newly reformed state of Israel and summarily had their asses handed to them on a plate.Had the Arabs won I am in no doubt that genocide would have taken place.Since then Israel has performed wonders while transforming a scrubland into a green and pleasant land.The palestinians are a lazy, ignorant, mob of itinerant arabs who could just as easily lay claim to Jordan or Syria or any other number of new Arab countries.Of all the displaced people in the world I think the case of the Palistinians ownership of Israel is the most tenous.

You will disagree, but you won't post an argument except to tell me to brush my teeth, this is because you are a halfwit with minimal knowledge of the subject.I advise you to spend some time on research then get back to the thread so that I can laugh at the ridiculous conclusions you have reached.

You could start by googling Israels historical right, you may get a clue.When you done that I will set another lesson for you.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

since none of you pussies have even the slightest interest in anymore more than typical knee jerk zionism...

*
Is the two-state solution in danger?*

Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert recently told Haaretz that, "More and more Palestinians are uninterested in a negotiated, two-state solution, because they want to change the essence of the conflict from an Algerian paradigm to a South African one. From a struggle against 'occupation,' in their parlance, to a struggle for one-man-one-vote. That is, of course, a much cleaner struggle, a much more popular struggle - and ultimately a much more powerful one. For us, it would mean the end of the Jewish state."
Is the two-state solution in danger? - Haaretz - Israel News


*U.K.'s boycotters of Israel support a single-state solution*

The activists at these groups may differ on issues such as religion and gender equality, but they are united in their perception of Israel as an apartheid state. They all advocate boycotting Israel and believe in diverting funds from it.

The organizations subscribe to the belief that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be resolved in the form of a single-state solutions, and granting the Palestinian refugees the right of return. In the past year, this group of organizations has boasted several important accomplishments, first and foremost the UCU resolution. 
U.K.'s boycotters of Israel support a single-state solution - Haaretz - Israel News


*
For some Palestinians, one state with Israel is better than none*
Frustrated by years of failed peace talks for a two-state solution, some are giving up hope of independence and pushing the idea of a single democratic state with equal rights for all.
For some Palestinians, one state with Israel is better than none - Los Angeles Times


----------



## jillian (Jul 15, 2008)

There won't ever be a one state solution. So you can keep trying to get one that makes Israel disappear, but it isn't going to happen, regardless of who supports it.


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

jillian said:


> There won't ever be a one state solution. So you can keep trying to get one that makes Israel disappear, but it isn't going to happen, regardless of who supports it.



Bingo!


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Are those newspaper articles supposed to validate you? I don't see any value in them.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Read and learn.
Myths & Facts - Israel&#146;s Roots


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> All I'm saying is that I support Israel's right to exist.  Period.
> 
> You don't need my permission to twist that into some retarded stretch about me being a Nazi just like you don't need my permission to cry to the mods after being bitch slapped.  It's just what you do.



of course you do.  And Jo Goebbles felt the exact same way about the third fucking reich.

Now, when you climb off of your lame fucking high horse and consider how similar your arguements are to his in rationalizing an ethnic standard for israel feel free to avoid your own racism with more knee jerk ad hominems.


IVE posted my position on a single state solution that validates ALL of my posts.  If you can't address that then, please, feel free to share a laugh with the mods about the idea that i've EVER ran crying to them about anything.

In case you haven't noticed, I don't have even the slightest iota of a problem handling the likes of you myself.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Read and learn.
> Myths & Facts - Israels Roots



oh WOW!  the JEWISH VIRTUAL LIBRARY!  Holy BAT SHIT!!  What on EARTH would we EXPECT the JEWISH VIRTUAL LIBRARY to say about the subject?


Holy FUCK, batman, I wonder what the NAZI LIBRARY had to say about white power??


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

jillian said:


> There won't ever be a one state solution. So you can keep trying to get one that makes Israel disappear, but it isn't going to happen, regardless of who supports it.



we'll see about that.  Aryans thought the same thing about jews in Germany too so.. Your bullshit zionism doesn't shock me any more than your lack of forsight beyond calling someone a jew hating antisemite.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> We were being benevolent, *there is a difference*.The place was a shithole that nobody wanted except the Jews, we handed it over the day before our tenure was up.The Arabs then decided they would attack the newly reformed state of Israel and summarily had their asses handed to them on a plate.Had the Arabs won I am in no doubt that genocide would have taken place.Since then Israel has performed wonders while transforming a scrubland into a green and pleasant land.*The palestinians are a lazy, ignorant, mob of itinerant arabs* who could just as easily lay claim to Jordan or Syria or any other number of new Arab countries.Of all the displaced people in the world I think the case of the Palistinians ownership of Israel is the most tenous.
> 
> You will disagree, but you won't post an argument except to tell me to brush my teeth, this is because you are a halfwit with minimal knowledge of the subject.I advise you to spend some time on research then get back to the thread so that I can laugh at the ridiculous conclusions you have reached.
> 
> You could start by googling Israels historical right, you may get a clue.When you done that I will set another lesson for you.



EVERYONE has an excuse, don't they, pussy?  Hell, a BRIT rationalizing the domination of a indegenous population SURE IS NOVEL!

Now, feel free to call ME the fucking racist after that awesome example of "well, they were all shifty eyed and lazy" excuses for your vivid racist policy.


BRAVO, dude.


fuckinig BRAVO.




It's a fucking SHOCK that you come from the same nation that eventually gave us an aparthied in AFRICA too, bitch.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> Bingo!



Im sure her post made your jackboots stand erect but someday the wold will ask why isral is allowed to do what germany could not and, cry antisemite all you want to, you know you don't have a worthwhile answer.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 15, 2008)

Wow


----------



## jillian (Jul 15, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Wow



Israel shouldn't exist; Jews should be subjugated and extinguished by Muslims in yet another Arab State, but he's not an anti-semite, right?

lol... Too funny.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Are those newspaper articles supposed to validate you? I don't see any value in them.



of course you don't.  But, then again, you don't see value in toothpaste either so...


big fucking deal.   Face it.  You ARE to israel what a nazi was to Germany.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> EVERYONE has an excuse, don't they, pussy?  Hell, a BRIT rationalizing the domination of a indegenous population SURE IS NOVEL!
> 
> Now, feel free to call ME the fucking racist after that awesome example of "well, they were all shifty eyed and lazy" excuses for your vivid racist policy.
> 
> ...




What a proper idiot you are, neither wonder you are made to look ridiculous on a regular basis here when you dismiss out of hand links to researchable and verified facts.Laughing stock springs to mind.You may or may not realise it but nearly everyone here sniggers at your outrageous ignorance and childish beligerence.Carry on, Blowhard.


----------



## roomy (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> of course you don't.  But, then again, you don't see value in toothpaste either so...
> 
> 
> big fucking deal.   Face it.  You ARE to israel what a nazi was to Germany.




What a revelation, you've convinced me with your well thought out and reasoned reply.Yes we should kill the Jews and call Israel Palestine, it's a crying shame that the nazis missed a few, EH.


You fucking sociopathic anti-semite.I cannot help but think this.You are a waste of time to argue with except for entertainment and comedy value.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> What a proper idiot you are, neither wonder you are made to look ridiculous on a regular basis here when you dismiss out of hand links to researchable and verified facts.Laughing stock springs to mind.You may or may not realise it but nearly everyone here sniggers at your outrageous ignorance and childish beligerence.Carry on, Blowhard.



Oh, no, Roomy...we are all terrified from the mighty beat downs he gives us with his superior intelligence.


----------



## manifold (Jul 15, 2008)

Who the fuck is saying that Israel should be allowed to do what Germany wasn't? 

Soggy's fantasyland gets screwier and screwier everyday.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> Jews have been present in the region for 3000 years, longer than anyone else by far, historically it is their land.
> 
> God promise them this land, so biblically it is their land.
> 
> ...



But you didn't honor the promise you had T.E. Laurence make to the Arabs.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

manifold said:


> Who the fuck is saying that Israel should be allowed to do what Germany wasn't?
> 
> Soggy's fantasyland gets screwier and screwier everyday.



You do.  by evidence of your own one sided concern over israel DESPITE pals.

but hey, i hear if you call me a joooo hating antisemite the burden of defending your preposterous racism will become moot.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> What a proper idiot you are, neither wonder you are made to look ridiculous on a regular basis here when you dismiss out of hand links to researchable and verified facts.Laughing stock springs to mind.You may or may not realise it but nearly everyone here sniggers at your outrageous ignorance and childish beligerence.Carry on, Blowhard.



HA!

made to look like an idiot, eh?  thats about as accurate and calling you the posterboy for dental hygiene.

indeed, who knew that YOU, dear brit, are the collective mouthpiece for everyone on this forum.

verifiable facts indeed, puss.  I see you have yet to post anything besides shit talking that validates your lame assed racism.  


maybe you should put this much energy into brushing your fucking teeth.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

roomy said:


> What a revelation, you've convinced me with your well thought out and reasoned reply.Yes we should kill the Jews and call Israel Palestine, it's a crying shame that the nazis missed a few, EH.
> 
> 
> You fucking sociopathic anti-semite.I cannot help but think this.You are a waste of time to argue with except for entertainment and comedy value.



Have I called for killing any jews?

nope.

but hey, it's all good.  I've kicked you in the gut enough today.  It would be redundant to point out ONE MORE TIME how baseless your antisemite accusations are.  You know you are just as much of a racist bastard as the nazis were.  Foaming at the mouth won't make the turd of your opinion any easier to spitshine.

ANY nation that holds an ethnic standard is no better than nazi germany.  Put that in your burning bush and smoke it.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 15, 2008)

jillian said:


> Israel shouldn't exist; Jews should be subjugated and extinguished by Muslims in yet another Arab State, but he's not an anti-semite, right?
> 
> lol... Too funny.



No shit, you forgot Israel is no different than Nazi Germany. Yep it is true last time I was there I almost got sick from the smell of the GAS CHAMBERS.

Unbelievable


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

*Olmert: 'If talks fail, Israel will be finished'*

Mr Olmert told the liberal daily Haaretz: "If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights (also for the Palestinians in the territories), then, as soon as that happens, the state of Israel is finished."

Olmert: 'If talks fail, Israel will be finished' - Middle East, World - The Independent

*
Two-state solution Israel's only lifeline-Olmert*

Olmert said that if Israel failed to agree to a two-state solution and tried to absorb Palestinians into a Jewish state without giving them equal voting rights, influential U.S. Jewish organisations "will be the first to come out against us".

"They will say they cannot support a state that does not support democracy and equal voting rights for all its residents," he said.

Two-state solution Israel's only lifeline-Olmert | Reuters
*
Skepticism Grows Over Two-State Mideast Solution*
*
"We're talking about democracy &#8212; one person, one vote, equal economic and political rights. We're talking about equal rights, we're talking about no difference between Jew, Muslim or Christian in one democratic state," he says.*

Skepticism Grows Over Two-State Mideast Solution : NPR


Holy SHIT!  A brit doesn't care about subjugating an ethnic majority for the sake of a dominant MINORITY?!?!?!


Say it isn't SO, Nelson Mandela!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> No shit, you forgot Israel is no different than Nazi Germany. Yep it is true last time I was there I almost got sick from the smell of the GAS CHAMBERS.
> 
> Unbelievable



whats unbelievable is that you haven't learned a thing about the holocaust unless it's used as some blank check excuse for israel.  Gas chambers sure are the standard by which all social marginalization takes place!


Just ask a fucking black south African!


poor guy.. see, THIS is where you call me a jew hating antisemite since tired martyr routines have amounted to chicken little's star gazing.


Israel SHOULD exist for BOTH peoples.  not just your common fucking denominator.  That, sir, is the kind of shit Aryans thought made sense.


But hey.. who needs to face the fact of racist national standards in israel when assuming i want to throw a jew down a well works just as, uh, well?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 15, 2008)

Main Entry:
    de·moc·ra·cy Listen to the pronunciation of democracy
Pronunciation:
    \di-&#712;mä-kr&#601;-s&#275;\ 
Function:
    noun 
Inflected Form(s):
    plural de·moc·ra·cies
Etymology:
    Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek d&#275;mokratia, from d&#275;mos + -kratia -cracy
Date:
    1576

1 a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections2: a political unit that has a democratic government3capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States <from emancipation Republicanism to New Deal Democracy&#8212; C. M. Roberts>4: the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority5: *the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges*


democracy - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary


funny, i dont see a single thing about respecting burning bush mythology for the sake of a single ethnic population.   It seems the Ku Klux Klan could have taken some lessons from the likes of zionists.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> whats unbelievable is that you haven't learned a thing about the holocaust unless it's used as some blank check excuse for israel.  Gas chambers sure are the standard by which all social marginalization takes place!
> 
> 
> Just ask a fucking black south African!
> ...




I was not excusing Israel for anything. You should read some of my other posts on the subject. I am critical of a lot of what Israel does. However I wont stand for people comparing Israel to Nazi Germany. Thats a load of BS.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> No shit, you forgot Israel is no different than Nazi Germany. Yep it is true last time I was there I almost got sick from the smell of the GAS CHAMBERS.
> 
> Unbelievable



You and Jillian are failing to understand that some people have little sense of humor and no understanding of satire at all.

However, I have been doing some thinking when reading through this thread, and I am pretty certain that over several years of participating on message boards, I have been called more names and had the most uncomplimentary adjectives attached to my comments for the following general subject, not necessarily in the following order: 

1) Any attempt to argue in favor of anything President George W. Bush has ever proposed, said, or done.

2) Any argument in favor of the traditional defintion of marriage.

3) Any reference defending God or Christianity.

4) Any argument in favor of making most illegals uncomfortable and unwelcome in the USA.

5) Any defense of Israel related to Palestine or any other group committed to the extermination of Israel.

And sometimes it can get very ugly indeed.  And I bet I, a non-Jew, get accused of and blessed out for every bit as much bias, prejudice, radicalism, and racism as you Jews do.  I don't think the flak is directed at you because you are Jews, though.  I think you take heat because you can sometimes speak with authority that a shiska cannot.  But it is for that reason that I think you need to participate on the Israeli/Palestinian et al threads.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 15, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> You and Jillian are failing to understand that some people have little sense of humor and no understanding of satire at all.
> 
> However, I have been doing some thinking when reading through this thread, and I am pretty certain that over several years of participating on message boards, I have been called more names and had the most uncomplimentary adjectives attached to my comments for the following general subject, not necessarily in the following order:
> 
> ...



Yep, Jillian and a few others have already convinced me I have to post on these topics, As much as I didn't want to. However some of the responses to this thread and others I have now posted on kinda prove my point. Because I am part Jewish I am often dismissed as not being allowed to have an opinion on the matter, or called a Zionist. Which I am anything but. You ever hear a Zionist call for a return to the 67 borders of For Israel to move it's capitol back to Tel Aviv? I haven't lol, Yet I am called it. 

Maybe they are not Anti-Semites but surely many of them are Anti Israelis. Trying to say Israel is the Bad guy and the Palestinians good is well, I can't even put it into words. Suffice to say it is just plain wrong.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 15, 2008)

Shogun said:


> You do.  by evidence of your own one sided concern over israel DESPITE pals.
> 
> but hey, i hear if you call me a joooo hating antisemite the burden of defending your preposterous racism will become moot.



Belt up, you ponce!


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Yep, Jillian and a few others have already convinced me I have to post on these topics, As much as I didn't want to. However some of the responses to this thread and others I have now posted on kinda prove my point. Because I am part Jewish I am often dismissed as not being allowed to have an opinion on the matter, or called a Zionist. Which I am anything but. You ever hear a Zionist call for a return to the 67 borders of For Israel to move it's capitol back to Tel Aviv? I haven't lol, Yet I am called it.
> 
> Maybe they are not Anti-Semites but surely many of them are Anti Israelis. Trying to say Israel is the Bad guy and the Palestinians good is well, I can't even put it into words. Suffice to say it is just plain wrong.



People convinced you that you HAVE TO post on "these" topics ???? Did they have to twist you arm and everything ?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 15, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> People convinced you that you HAVE TO post on "these" topics ???? Did they have to twist you arm and everything ?



Nah they just reminded me that being part Jewish I have an interest in the Issues and therefore a duty to be proactive when ever I can.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Nah they just reminded me that being part Jewish I have an interest in the Issues and therefore a duty to be proactive when ever I can.



ahhhhhhhhhhh I get it--had to remind you who you are and a duty you have to perform ???


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 15, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Nah they just reminded me that being part Jewish I have an interest in the Issues and therefore a duty to be proactive when ever I can.



Tell 'em that doesn't follow.  I'm not Jewish but I don't feel I can't participate (my lack of knowledge is the real reason).


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 15, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Tell 'em that doesn't follow.  I'm not Jewish but I don't feel I can't participate (my lack of knowledge is the real reason).



They're just trying to make him feel guilty --no reasoning to follow at all.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 15, 2008)

Ah, bloody tricksters!  Tell 'em to get stuffed Charles.  

Or as Roomy might put it, "belt up you ponces!" (Why do I hear Vyvyan's voice from 'The Young Ones' when I read that?)


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Screw em!!

lol that reminds me of that movie legends of the fall. When the old man is like.

"screw em, screw the government"

wow I guess I am drunk wtf does that have to do with anything 

sorry


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Screw em!!
> 
> lol that reminds me of that movie legends of the fall. When the old man is like.
> 
> ...



I like posting when I get shit-faced....I just hate it when I have to read what I wrote when I sober up


----------



## Rhys (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> You don't have a clue what you're talking about....but keep repeating the same anti-semetic crap.
> 
> Nice that "some of your best friends are...."



Like your master, Goebbels, you believe that the bigger the lie the better, clearly.   Alas, zionists, like their models, are beyond shame.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> It seems to me that when Israel was given back to the Jews it was an exercise in salving conscience.Israels willingness to defend itself is testament to the courage of a people who are saying...No more fucking shit from you lot.For fucks sake who in their right mind would argue that Israel has no right to exist, if I was a Jew the antisemites amongst you would worry.



Correction... the land that is now Israel was taken, not given.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> "they"??? riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.... 1.5% of the population of the country runs things.... suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure it does.... no bias in spreading racist stereotypes...nah...
> 
> You are aware, aren't you, that trying to discredit groups that defend jews and defend Israel is in large part a continuation of the pro-palestinian propaganda that seems to have perverted a great deal of today's educational and political systems....
> 
> ...




Not that I'm defending the thoughts, if you could call them that, of the poster you replied to, but could you name a bigger and more successful lobby than AIPAC? The difference between AIPAC and CAIR is that AIPAC is successful. 

There are plenty of "Greater Israel" types in AIPAC.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> I figure the palestinians have as much right to go back to Israel as I have to go back to Belarus....



When did Ben Gurion give orders for you to be purged from Belarus?


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> The worst part of the whole right of return argument is that they want the right for not only those who left to return, but their families and decendents. If they were allowed the Jews in Israel would end up a very small minority in that land, and then you would see Genocide on a scale not seen since WWII. In the area anyways.



Israel has a right of return law. 

Law of Return - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Yep,
> 
> I also noticed how at one point Israel actually offered to return the west bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt, and Both refused. It seemed they didn't want to deal with the Palestinians either.
> 
> I know I will catch flak for this, but in reality the Palestinians are Nothing but Jordanians and Egyptians. It was not until the Birth of Israel that people began calling them Palestinians.



The area around Jerusalem was called Palestine as early as Herodotus. Ancient Egyptians called it Palestine. Romans called it Palestine. Ottomans appointed a governor of Palestine. Palestine was part of Syria before the Brits decided that Arabs weren't human beings and divided the region. 

But do rant on about propaganda.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> Since time immemorial might is right.We Brits wrote a lot of history and we say the Jews can have Israel.If it was left up to me they could have a whole lot fucking more of the desert, push all those muslim fuckers into Asia
> 
> Seriously though folks, who in their right mind begrudges them sovereign land?
> 
> Any palestinian terrorists here? Thought not.



And that white trash Brit entitlement ideology is how a 100 lb man in a loin cloth chased your evil and twisted "empire" out of India.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Israel also asked their Arab Israeli citizens, who professed loyalty to the palestinians if they would like the lines redrawn to put them in palestinian territory and they said... "hell no".



I'm moving into half of your home. We are going to draw a red line through the middle. We can adjust the line so you have access to your... well now my bathroom if you'd like? Oh, you reject this? Ok well get the fuck out then.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> What a shock.  Sealybobo's a complete artard on yet another topic.  Are you educated on ANY subject at all?
> 
> Our dependence on oil dictates our policy in the Middle East.  The fact that against all odds, the underdog -- a fledgling Israel -- knocked the living shit out of the combined Arab nations brought the US to Israel's cause.  The US originally opposed the partition of Palestine.
> 
> A fact later generations seem to have forgotten just as they forgot what a murdering scumbag Yassir Arafat was and awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize, taking away any meaning or value from the award.



The United States acknowledged Israel between 11 and 13 seconds after its official declaration of statehood. The United States expressed almost unanimous support for the Jewish state since 1948. 

You failed to mention that another self avowed terrorist, Menachem Begin, is also a Nobel awardee.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> *yawn*.... like you're the only one who puts this country before Israel. If I were more concerned with Israel than I am with this country, I'd vote for McCain in November....
> 
> I'm sorry if you don't *get* that calling zionism racism is anti-semitic.
> 
> The British Mandate was officially divided by the United Nations in 1948. That makes the Jewish State legal. There is nothing RACIST about that.



If you are using UN resolutions as legally binding, Israel is quite behind the legal ball. 

List of United Nations resolutions concerning Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> Did you know that Saudi Arabia was not created until 1913, Lebanon until 1920? Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932, Syria until 1941. The borders of Jordan were established in 1946 and Kuwait in 1961. Any of these nations that would say Israel is only a recent arrival would have to deny their own rights as recent arrivals as well. They did not exist as countries. They were all under the control of the Turks.



Your complete lack of understanding of the historical narrative of the region is not really that surprising. 

Read this, stupid. 

MidEast Web - Husayn-McMahon Correspondence

Brits promise independence to Arabs for revolt against the Ottomans, Ottomans fall, Brits do what they do and colonize.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> When did Ben Gurion give orders for you to be purged from Belarus?



Was that before or after the nazi loving Grand Mufti of Jerusalem told the palestinians to drive the jews into the sea? This is what I mean about you not knowing your history.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> When did Germany win a war in europe?
> 
> WWI? WWII?
> 
> hmmmmm



UMMMMMMMMMMM......

German unification - Hutchinson encyclopedia article about German unification

More stuff happened than what you learned in high school


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> Your complete lack of understanding of the historical narrative of the region is not really that surprising.
> 
> Read this, stupid.
> 
> ...



No, honey/ He's far from stupid. Did the british screw up lots of the world with imperialism? Yes. But the Arabs backed the wrong horse. They backed the Germans. Losers lose land.

If you can put your Israel-hating rhetoric aside, and get your head on straight, and maybe stop sounding like a high school aged brat, perhaps you'll learn that you're not going to undo history. What happened then really doesn't matter any more than my family being run out of Belarus by pogroms and, later, Stalin, does.

The only thing that's relevant is solving the problem.

I'm sorry Israel's existence troubles you. But it will never be an Arab State. So once you get that through your Palestinian terrorist loving head, and realize that a two-state solution is the only one that's ever going to happen, perhaps that part of the world settles down.

But why would we be realistic about it? It might upset Hamas.

Buy a clue.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> We were being benevolent, there is a difference.The place was a shithole that nobody wanted except the Jews, we handed it over the day before our tenure was up.The Arabs then decided they would attack the newly reformed state of Israel and summarily had their asses handed to them on a plate.Had the Arabs won I am in no doubt that genocide would have taken place.Since then Israel has performed wonders while transforming a scrubland into a green and pleasant land.The palestinians are a lazy, ignorant, mob of itinerant arabs who could just as easily lay claim to Jordan or Syria or any other number of new Arab countries.Of all the displaced people in the world I think the case of the Palistinians ownership of Israel is the most tenous.



No stupid, your sick and evil "empire" was chased out by Zionist terrorism. 

Nice projection of overt fascism against Arabs. Tool .


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> There won't ever be a one state solution. So you can keep trying to get one that makes Israel disappear, but it isn't going to happen, regardless of who supports it.



Of course not. The right wing will never give Arabs equal rights and will never give up the dream of a Jewish theocracy across all the mandate. If either side could get their right in order maybe the deaths will stop someday.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I was not excusing Israel for anything. You should read some of my other posts on the subject. I am critical of a lot of what Israel does. However I wont stand for people comparing Israel to Nazi Germany. Thats a load of BS.



In all fairness, his point seems to be that the ideas on the religious demographic in Israel seem eerily similar to the racial demographic ideas of the Nazis. I don't think there was any implied comparison to the Holocaust.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Yep, Jillian and a few others have already convinced me I have to post on these topics, As much as I didn't want to. However some of the responses to this thread and others I have now posted on kinda prove my point. Because I am part Jewish I am often dismissed as not being allowed to have an opinion on the matter, or called a Zionist. Which I am anything but. You ever hear a Zionist call for a return to the 67 borders of For Israel to move it's capitol back to Tel Aviv? I haven't lol, Yet I am called it.
> 
> Maybe they are not Anti-Semites but surely many of them are Anti Israelis. Trying to say Israel is the Bad guy and the Palestinians good is well, I can't even put it into words. Suffice to say it is just plain wrong.



It's capital is in Tel Aviv.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> In all fairness, his point seems to be that the ideas on the religious demographic in Israel seem eerily similar to the racial demographic ideas of the Nazis. I don't think there was any implied comparison to the Holocaust.



Puleeze.... every Muslim country excludes Jews. Do you think Jews can set foot in Saudi Arabia.

Do you not understand that the whole Nazi "comparison" is blatantly anti-semitic?  Why aren't you whinging about Muslim Countries? The UAE didn't exist til it was created after WWII ... come on. Let's hear it.

The difference is Arab Israeli's have more rights in Isarel than they do in Arab countries. So I'm not sure how your fake assertion holds up.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> No, honey/ He's far from stupid. Did the british screw up lots of the world with imperialism? Yes. But the Arabs backed the wrong horse. They backed the Germans. Losers lose land.



No sunshine, the Ottoman government, TURKS, sided with Germany. On the written agreement given by the British government for Arab independence, the ARAB governor of the Hijaz (Mecca & Medina) called for ARABS to rise against the TURKISH Ottoman government. It can be argued that the ARAB uprising against the TURKS was the greatest variable that led to victory in the Middle East for the Allies. 

Why don't you lecture me on history and religious/ racial prejudice after you can keep your brown people straight. Arabs were subjugated by Turks, then Brits and French and now Zionists and corrupt governments of the Middle East funded and supported by the west. 



> If you can put your Israel-hating rhetoric aside, and get your head on straight, and maybe stop sounding like a high school aged brat, perhaps you'll learn that you're not going to undo history. What happened then really doesn't matter any more than my family being run out of Belarus by pogroms and, later, Stalin, does.



Funny, what happened doesn't matter until you want to rant about Nazi Mufti's. 



> The only thing that's relevant is solving the problem.



There was this experiment in North America you may have heard of? Democratic republic with equal rights for minorities? Ever heard of it?  



> I'm sorry Israel's existence troubles you. But it will never be an Arab State.



Doesn't trouble me. I'm sorry the existence of Arabs on earth troubles you. 



> So once you get that through your Palestinian terrorist loving head,



Ahhh the enlightened anti-anti-semitic warrior shows her true colors, again. Again, Menchem Begin. 



> and realize that a two-state solution is the only one that's ever going to happen, perhaps that part of the world settles down.



Remove the occupation and allow the Palestinians to erect a state then. 



> But why would we be realistic about it? It might upset Hamas.



Or NRP, a Israeli coalition that is part of the coalition govt that sponsors settler militias that carry out attacks on Arabs. But the Jerusalem post doesn't report on that, so it must not exist. NRP and Hamas' goals are similar: The destruction of the other side. 



> Buy a clue.



We have all your clues. Jews = good. everyone else = bad.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> Of course not. The right wing will never give Arabs equal rights and will never give up the dream of a Jewish theocracy across all the mandate. If either side could get their right in order maybe the deaths will stop someday.



The deaths will stop when terrorists stop blowing themselves up to kill innocent people.

Israel isn't a theocracy. Again, get your facts straight. I really have little patience for people who support policies which would result only in dead jews not knowing their facts.

Arab Israelis have full rights of citizenship. What Israel won't do is make Israel another Arab State in the mid-east. You think deaths stop if it becomes an Arab country? Or you just don't mind dead Jews?


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Puleeze.... every Muslim country excludes Jews. Do you think Jews can set foot in Saudi Arabia.
> 
> Do you not understand that the whole Nazi "comparison" is blatantly anti-semitic?  Why aren't you whinging about Muslim Countries? The UAE didn't exist til it was created after WWII ... come on. Let's hear it.
> 
> The difference is Arab Israeli's have more rights in Isarel than they do in Arab countries. So I'm not sure how your fake assertion holds up.



The difference is that Israel is a democracy. Make Bibi dictator and see how long it takes for all of Gaza to be on fire. It is not Islam that keeps the Middle East mired in the past, it is the lack of self determination. 

We usually do use the Nazi's to make comparisons to any effort of ethnic cleansing or prejudicial govt policies. I guess calling South Africa nazi-like would have been anti-semitic as well. 

Seven nations that were Islamic in identity formed a federation called the UAE. Hardly a comparison to anything discussed here.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> The difference is that Israel is a democracy. Make Bibi dictator and see how long it takes for all of Gaza to be on fire.



Brilliant argument, not. The dictatorships and the democracies in question have chosen their style of government and the Arab citizens seem perfectly happy excluding Jews from their lands.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> The deaths will stop when terrorists stop blowing themselves up to kill innocent people.



Right. Palestinians are never attacked by settlers because the Jerusalem Post doesn't report it. 



> Israel isn't a theocracy. Again, get your facts straight.



No shit it's not a theocracy. If the right wing had its way, it would be. Since Israel is a democracy, unlike any other state in the region, its retard wing is kept in check. In Egypt and Saudi Arabia, for example, the retard wing has absolutely power. 



> I really have little patience for people who support policies which would result only in dead jews not knowing their facts.



I have little patience for people who think Arabs are Nazis. I have little patience for hypocrites who support their prejudices as sound policy while ranting like they are a liberal about equality.  



> Arab Israelis have full rights of citizenship.



Israel's colonial subjects do not have any rights. 



> What Israel won't do is make Israel another Arab State in the mid-east.



No one expects them too. I personally expect them to allow all people under its thumb to have ALL equal rights. Or they could withdraw the occupation and divest from Palestinian politics and FINALLY allow the Palestinian people self determination. 



> You think deaths stop if it becomes an Arab country? Or you just don't mind dead Jews?



Unlike you, I have a general distaste for the death of anyone. I think the deaths stop with a real sovereign Palestinian state and Israel as a negotiator, not dictator of negotiations on other disputes. Shebba, Golan, etc.


----------



## editec (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Israel shouldn't exist; Jews should be subjugated and extinguished by Muslims in yet another Arab State, but he's not an anti-semite, right?
> 
> lol... Too funny.


 
Okay, now who actually said that, Jillian?

I've sort of come in on the last page and must missed it if that was stated recently.

Are you serious or are you paraphrasing what you think people are saying, but haven't _exactly_ said?

Remember, now, you also decided that you can restate my positions without my having EVER said anything remotely like what you credited me as having said, too.

So on THIS SUBJECT, I don't think I am being unreasonable to ask you this question.

I'm not asking us to just all get along, now, I'm merely asking us to stop putting word into other people's mouths.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Reality*
> Since Israel is a democracy, unlike any other state in the region, its retard wing is kept in check.



Reality

You're doing a fantastic job at debunking the arguments of the defenders of ethnic supremacism in Palestine but this part was a real disappointment.

The only place where Israel is a democratic state is inside the obscure, twisted mind of the super patriotic american clowns of this message board.

*SERIOUS* political thinkers unanimously declare Israel a jewish racial dictatorship.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> Okay, now who actually said that, Jillian?



I have no problem stating that Israel has no right to exist, editec.

Ethnic supremacist states have no right to exist at all, no matter how many times western leaders state otherwise.

The only "right" racial dictatorships have is the right to be peacefully dismantled and replaced by democratic, secular governments just like in South Africa.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

José;720307 said:
			
		

> I have no problem stating that Israel has no right to exist, editec.
> 
> Ethnic supremacist states have no right to exist at all, no matter how many times western leaders state otherwise.
> 
> The only "right" racial dictatorships have is the right to be peacefully dismantled and replaced by democratic, secular governments just like in South Africa.



The Egyptians enslaved the Jews an estimated 1200 to 1400 years or so BC.  The Babylonians evicted the Jews from their homeland roughly 600 or so BC--Cyrus of Persia allowed them to return more than a century later.  The Romans evicted the Jews from Jerusalem the first century AD.  From Constantine (4th Century) until the Renaissance and Reformation, Jews were mostly forbidden to own land and most other real property throughout the lands that made up the Roman Empire.  By the 20th Century the Jews were being treated miserably in many countries in Europe and the near East with families, businesses, industries, whole villages wiped out in viscious pograms in Russia, Romania, and elsewhere.  By some estimates, between the pograms and the German genocide committed during WW11, as many as 11 million Jews may been killed.  And pockets of discrimination specifically directed at the Jews have continued on most continents since WWII.  As recently as the 1960's or 1970's, a largest group of Jews suffering intense discrimination in South America pulled up stakes and emigrated to Israel.

Given the tragic history of the Jews and the long history of discriminatory and genocidal treatment, it was a humane and practical effort for the UN nations to provide Israel one tiny TINY plot of ground on the face of the Earth where the Jews would not be discriminated against, where they could set up their own government and practice their own religion as they saw fit.  It was one place on Earth that Jews could be Jews without fear of being punished or discriminated against for who they are.

Great Britain provided the land; the remainder of the UN provided the charter under which Israel would be authorized.  That was in 1948.

Immediately the Arab community organized to exterminate the Jews of the new Israel.  Most of the Palestinians left expecting that process to be accomplished quickly and then they would return sans Jews.  Of course, the Israelis prevailed and the Arabs, though they have stirved mightily to do so, have been unable to exterminate them.  The Palestinians who didn't flee Israel are full Israeli citizens with all rights and privileges of citizenship within Israel and with seats on the Knesset.  There are more than 1 million of them in a tiny country and they are prospering.  The only ones who do not are those who do not by choice by insisting to live in the desert where they do not have to be 'contaminated' by Jews.  That sound discriminatory to me.  But I find no discrimination among the Israelis.

But yes, Israel do take strong exception to Arabs who kidnap and torture and murder Israelis, who blow up crowded markets and synagogues and busloads of mothers and school children, and who fire thousands of rockets into Israel hoping to kill Israeli men, women, and children.  I think it is pretty okay to discriminate against people who do that and/or who condone that.

Don't you?


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

I guess it must be a Zionist controlled media conspiracy going on here since the only time I've ever heard Israel referred to as a racial dictatorship is when it's posted by anonymous dillholes on a messageboard...and few and far between at that.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 16, 2008)

I thought I read somewhere that Israel has a secular constitution.  But I could be wrong of course.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

Israel's government is a democratic republic with free and secret elections held every four years similar to our own.  Israeli laws allows complete freedom of religion.  The only non-secular component of their government is a system by which Israeli Jews will retain control of the government so that there is no chance that the Jews themselves can be discriminated against--but this stipulation is not based on religion but ethnicity.  Admittedly non-Jews in Israel are therefore at the mercy of the Israeli majority; however the Israeli government is a shining jewel of democracy and personal freedoms in a sea of despotic backward Arab nations.  It would be possible for discrimination to be practiced via Israeli government, but there is none other than that insurance that the government will remain in the control of the Israeli Jews.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

editec said:


> Okay, now who actually said that, Jillian?



What do you think putting an Arab majority in control of a Jewish minority in Israel would mean.

I really hate it when people spout what they think are niceities, but fail to look at the actual application of what they espouse.



> I've sort of come in on the last page and must missed it if that was stated recently.
> 
> Are you serious or are you paraphrasing what you think people are saying, but haven't _exactly_ said?



Again, I look at what would actually happen if your one-state solution happened. I figure so are Israel's enemies. You should, too.



> Remember, now, you also decided that you can restate my positions without my having EVER said anything remotely like what you credited me as having said, too.



Like hell I did. I know what it means when someone calls me a zionist racist.



> So on THIS SUBJECT, I don't think I am being unreasonable to ask you this question.
> 
> I'm not asking us to just all get along, now, I'm merely asking us to stop putting word into other people's mouths.



I don't. I know exactly what I'm dealing with. And I know exactly what the ramifications of your policies are. Do you?


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 16, 2008)

Thanks for that Foxfyre - seems pretty reasonable to me.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I was not excusing Israel for anything. You should read some of my other posts on the subject. I am critical of a lot of what Israel does. However I wont stand for people comparing Israel to Nazi Germany. Thats a load of BS.



when you hold a RACIST ETHNIC STANDARD for israel while demonizing Aryans for the exact same goddamn thing then yes it is quite apt and valid.  Do you think gas chambers and xylon B are the ONLY way that a racist minority can marginalize an ethnic majority?  If so, then the irony of Nelson Mandela is lost on you.  Hate to break it to you but your shit sticks just like the rest of us whose pet nations wanted an ethnically pure standard.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shog, what are they doing that you feel is racist exactly?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Yep, Jillian and a few others have already convinced me I have to post on these topics, As much as I didn't want to. However some of the responses to this thread and others I have now posted on kinda prove my point. Because I am part Jewish I am often dismissed as not being allowed to have an opinion on the matter, or called a Zionist. Which I am anything but. You ever hear a Zionist call for a return to the 67 borders of For Israel to move it's capitol back to Tel Aviv? I haven't lol, Yet I am called it.
> 
> Maybe they are not Anti-Semites but surely many of them are Anti Israelis. Trying to say Israel is the Bad guy and the Palestinians good is well, I can't even put it into words. Suffice to say it is just plain wrong.



sorry.. gonna have to call shennanigans on you, buddy.  We can see the exact same social pattern when Euros decided that manifest destiny was more important than native consideration too.  The bottom line is that if YOU hold an ethnic standard for your pet nation, like german aryians and WHITE SOUTHERNERS and BRITISH SOUTH AFRIKANERS, then you are no better than those who put your ancestors in gas chambers.  If you think pointing this out amounts to antisemitism then you are no more interested in peace than Jill is.



Single state solution, dude.  If you can't stomach a plural israel then there is no reason germans, Americans or anyone else should have had to accepted you.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Belt up, you ponce!



i love your avatar, ang.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> when you hold a RACIST ETHNIC STANDARD for israel while demonizing Aryans for the exact same goddamn thing then yes it is quite apt and valid.  Do you think gas chambers and xylon B are the ONLY way that a racist minority can marginalize an ethnic majority?  If so, then the irony of Nelson Mandela is lost on you.  Hate to break it to you but your shit sticks just like the rest of us whose pet nations wanted an ethnically pure standard.



The "Aryans" attempted racial purity via extermination of the Jews along with homosexuals, gypsies, mental defectives, and other undesirable.

The Jews have attempted to exterminate nobody and afford full rights to citizenship to anybody of ANY ethnicity who are willing to be responsible Israeli citizens.

There is a huge difference between these two things.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Nah they just reminded me that being part Jewish I have an interest in the Issues and therefore a duty to be proactive when ever I can.



yea.. ask William Joyce about how that same statement applies to his forum interaction, dude.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> The deaths will stop when terrorists stop blowing themselves up to kill innocent people.
> 
> *Israel isn't a theocracy.* Again, get your facts straight. I really have little patience for people who support policies which would result only in dead jews not knowing their facts.
> 
> Arab Israelis have full rights of citizenship. What Israel won't do is make Israel another Arab State in the mid-east. You think deaths stop if it becomes an Arab country? Or you just don't mind dead Jews?



yeaaaa.. go tell that to the burning bush, jill.. 

funny how you ONLY care about dead JEWS though... nope.. thats not racist AT ALL!




full rights of citizenship my ass.  I'll quote Olmert, Jill.  Allowing blacks to vote didn't turn America into another AFRICAN nation either, brainiac.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

editec said:


> Okay, now who actually said that, Jillian?
> 
> I've sort of come in on the last page and must missed it if that was stated recently.
> 
> ...





indeed, WHO?  You see, no one HAS to say ANYTHING in order to have a Scarlet A applied.


it's the standard knee jerk reaction to an issue that she knows damn well she can't defend otherwise.  WE don't hold racist standards for citizenship in the west.  Jill does as long as it's jews instead of germans doing the rationalizing.


DEMOCRACY = One vote for ALL.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

manifold said:


> I guess it must be a Zionist controlled media conspiracy going on here since the only time I've ever heard Israel referred to as a racial dictatorship is when it's posted by anonymous dillholes on a messageboard...and few and far between at that.



Hey, that same media blackout made you think that South Africa was doing just fine in 1977 too, buddy.   Take your brain pill and call me in the morning.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Israel's government is a democratic republic with free and secret elections held every four years similar to our own.  Israeli laws allows complete freedom of religion.  *The only non-secular component of their government is a system by which Israeli Jews will retain control of the government so that there is no chance that the Jews themselves can be discriminated against--but this stipulation is not based on religion but ethnicity*.  Admittedly non-Jews in Israel are therefore at the mercy of the Israeli majority; however the Israeli government is a shining jewel of democracy and personal freedoms in a sea of despotic backward Arab nations.  It would be possible for discrimination to be practiced via Israeli government, but there is none other than that insurance that the government will remain in the control of the Israeli Jews.



shining jewel my ass.  SHINING JEWELS don't have aparthied walls.  You might as well have just said Birmingham alabama was the SHINING JEWEL of race relations in 1955.


Tell me how evil it is for white people to retain THEIR dominance here in the states as you totally miss the irony of your rationalized racism.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> What do you think putting an Arab majority in control of a Jewish minority in Israel would mean.
> I really hate it when people spout what they think are niceities, but fail to look at the actual application of what they espouse.
> 
> *
> ...





Face it.  You've been SERVED.  White people said the EXACT SAME THING pre-emancipation proclamation.  Pals are only your enemies if you make them such.  But, be honest, having an excuse for the martyr routine works out for you in the end, doesnt it?





*= *


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

Soggy's passion trifecta:

- Hatred of Jews
- Hatred of women
- A carton of Marlboros

What a guy!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Shog, what are they doing that you feel is racist exactly?



Restricting national control to only jews while marginalizing pals for the sake of an ALL JEWISH nation.


Tell me, Ravi, how would you feel about white people doing the exact same thing in the US?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> The "Aryans" attempted racial purity via extermination of the Jews along with homosexuals, gypsies, mental defectives, and other undesirable.
> 
> The Jews have attempted to exterminate nobody and afford full rights to citizenship to anybody of ANY ethnicity who are willing to be responsible Israeli citizens.
> 
> There is a huge difference between these two things.



Actually, the Aryans attempted racial purity for GERMANY and their conquered lands.  Israel HAS subjugated pals just like nazis did to it's unwanted.  FULL RIGHT OF CITIZENSHIP, eh?

yea, tell that to a black man in America after you insist that whites control the US.  You may want to find a difference but, I assure you, it's not there.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

manifold said:


> Soggy's passion trifecta:
> 
> - Hatred of Jews
> - Hatred of women
> ...



I don't hate jews any more than I hate women.  Indeed, since you can't offer anything more profound feel free to jump on the standard Scarlet A bandwagon.


and I smoke Camels, bitch.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Restricting national control to only jews while marginalizing pals for the sake of an ALL JEWISH nation.
> 
> 
> Tell me, Ravi, how would you feel about white people doing the exact same thing in the US?



I wouldn't like it. However, this seems like an extreme version of an immigration policy so I'm kind of surprised you are against it, knowing how you feel about Mexicans and all.

You do realize that Jews aren't even allowed to live in most of the countries in the middle east, don't you? That seems much more restrictive and discriminatory to me, yet you seem to have no problem with it.

Why is that?


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> shining jewel my ass.  SHINING JEWELS don't have aparthied walls.  You might as well have just said Birmingham alabama was the SHINING JEWEL of race relations in 1955.
> 
> 
> Tell me how evil it is for white people to retain THEIR dominance here in the states as you totally miss the irony of your rationalized racism.



Is there something in some people's DNA that forces them to compare apples to oranges?  No 'apartheid' wall existed until the Palestinians stepped up their efforts to kill, maim, and terrify Jews.  After so many bombings of crowded markets, theaters, busses loaded with school children, and synagogues full of worshipers, the wall went up.  And the bombings, killings, maimings virtually stopped.  That was not an 'apartheid' wall.  That was a self defense wall pure and simple.  And it will come down at such time as the Palestinian leadership stops attempting to kill Jews and stands with Israel in Israel's right to exist.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I don't hate jews any more than I hate women.  Indeed, since you can't offer anything more profound feel free to jump on the standard Scarlet A bandwagon.
> 
> 
> and I smoke Camels, bitch.





You're an extremist.

None of us doubt that you hate Jews any more than you hate women.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Actually, the Aryans attempted racial purity for GERMANY and their conquered lands.  Israel HAS subjugated pals just like nazis did to it's unwanted.  FULL RIGHT OF CITIZENSHIP, eh?
> 
> yea, tell that to a black man in America after you insist that whites control the US.  You may want to find a difference but, I assure you, it's not there.



You know, I honestly don't believe you are as stupid as your statement here is.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I wouldn't like it. However, this seems like an extreme version of an immigration policy so I'm kind of surprised you are against it, knowing how you feel about Mexicans and all.
> 
> You do realize that Jews aren't even allowed to live in most of the countries in the middle east, don't you? That seems much more restrictive and discriminatory to me, yet you seem to have no problem with it.
> 
> Why is that?




LATINOS ARE ALLOWED AN EQUAL VOTE AND IF ELECTED SO BE IT.  


Can Israel say the same thing about a pal prime minister?

gimme a fucking break, ravi.

Ask Jill if SHE would ever accept a PAL PM of Israel like I would a LATINO PRESIDENT.


The US doesn't represent, support or pretend arab nations are western democracies, Rav..   Why don't you google Iranian Jews and see what you come up with real quick before you start handing out lectures.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> Is there something in some people's DNA that forces them to compare apples to oranges? No 'apartheid' wall existed until the Palestinians stepped up their efforts to kill, maim, and terrify Jews. After so many bombings of crowded markets, theaters, busses loaded with school children, and synagogues full of worshipers, the wall went up. And the bombings, killings, maimings virtually stopped. That was not an 'apartheid' wall. That was a self defense wall pure and simple. And it will come down at such time as the Palestinian leadership stops attempting to kill Jews and stands with Israel in Israel's right to exist.



Now you're just raping History, plain and simple.

Everybody knows that the first decision the Israeli government took in 1948 was that Palestinian civilians who had fled the warzone would not be allowed to return.

Since then, any palestinian trying to return to their towns and villages of origin is immediatelly arrested at best and shot at worst.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> Israel's government is a democratic republic with free and secret elections held every four years similar to our own. Israeli laws allows complete freedom of religion.



South Africa under Apartheid could be considered a democratic state under your definition too.

The South African state was also *a democratic republic with free and secret elections held every four years similar to our own*.

Foxfyre himself conceding the fact that Israel is a racial dictatorship:

*The only non-secular component of their government* is a system by which *Israeli Jews will retain control of the government* so that there is no chance that the Jews themselves can be discriminated against--but this stipulation is not based on religion but *ethnicity*.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Is there something in some people's DNA that forces them to compare apples to oranges?  No 'apartheid' wall existed until the Palestinians stepped up their efforts to kill, maim, and terrify Jews.  After so many bombings of crowded markets, theaters, busses loaded with school children, and synagogues full of worshipers, the wall went up.  And the bombings, killings, maimings virtually stopped.  That was not an 'apartheid' wall.  That was a self defense wall pure and simple.  And it will come down at such time as the Palestinian leadership stops attempting to kill Jews and stands with Israel in Israel's right to exist.



apples to oranges?  THATS your rebuttal?  A refusal to face the same goddamn social process of ethnic marginalization?  NO APARTHIED WALL existed BEFORE THE STATE OF ISRAEL.  Don't let that fact send you into the orchard again.

Hey, make your excuses.. Hitler had his reason to boycott jewish business too.  give Pals a reason to love isreal by allowing them *GASP* the same relevance as a jew and the subjugated population will stop reacting violently.


Dare I make ANOTHER reference of a violent era of American civil rights that you'll ignore?


Like I said, make all the excuses you want, yo.  Your ability to swallow racism as necessary for a favored ethnicity isn't new.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> LATINOS ARE ALLOWED AN EQUAL VOTE AND IF ELECTED SO BE IT.
> 
> 
> Can Israel say the same thing about a pal prime minister?
> ...



The Pals aren't full citizens, though, are they? So why should they enjoy the benefits of full citizens? We do the same thing with temporary visas. I'll agree, it causes a lot of trouble to not grant people full citizenship, just take a look at France.

This thing you keep harping on, about them not being democracies. That doesn't matter in the least. The people in those particular theocratic dictatorships choose that form of government because they believe the Koran mandates it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> You're an extremist.
> 
> None of us doubt that you hate Jews any more than you hate women.



If equality is extreme to you then sure.. i must be a fucking rampaging nightmare.


Funny that you balk at equality across the board, ravi.. From parental rights to ethnic national policies you sure don't represent the left very well.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

> Originally posted by *manifold*
> I guess it must be a Zionist controlled media conspiracy going on here since the only time I've ever heard Israel referred to as a racial dictatorship is when it's posted by anonymous dillholes on a messageboard...and few and far between at that.



Well

If you spent less time creating anencephalic threads entitled Shogun this, Shogun that, and bothered to read a few textbooks on political science, you might actually stand a good chance of understanding the difference between a democratic state and an ethnocracy.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> You know, I honestly don't believe you are as stupid as your statement here is.



we can all talk shit.  Maybe you can try addressing my points with more than orchard speak.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

You cannot put a programmer like myself to perform a heart surgery because Im gonna kill the patient.

You cannot put a lawyer to build a house because its gonna collapse.

Similarly, you cannot put people who dont understand anything about political science to give a democratic certificate to any country because they will end up calling racist states democracies and vice versa.


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

José;720418 said:
			
		

> Well
> 
> If you spent less time creating anencephalic threads entitled Shogun this, Shogun that, and bothered to read a few textbooks on political science, you might actually stand a good chance of understanding the difference between a democratic state and an ethnocracy.



Or I could just take your word for it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> *The Pals aren't full citizens, though, are they?* So why should they enjoy the benefits of full citizens? We do the same thing with temporary visas. I'll agree, it causes a lot of trouble to not grant people full citizenship, just take a look at France.
> 
> This thing you keep harping on, about them not being democracies. That doesn't matter in the least. The people in those particular theocratic dictatorships choose that form of government because they believe the Koran mandates it.



You tell me.. ARE they ethnically qualified to count or not?  You people sure do bounce from position to position awfully quick.  One day, pals enjoy the same rights and the next day, they simply are not citizens.  the creation of israel is not a fucking Visa, ravi.

So you tell me.  Are YOU in favor of israel granting pals FULL CITIZENSHIP with all the political potential involved like I AM with latinos in America or not?  Careful of your answer, yo.

And yes, when you limit the RACIAL INFLUENCE of a democracy then it really isn't one, is it?  Are you proud to defend white landowning men who could rationalize THEIR premium status, ravi?


And, it's a fucking joke that you bring up the Koran given the Burning Bush excuse permeating the creation of isreal.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

I would pos rep ya, mani but it seems I have to spread it around.

who is fucking with whome here?  The very thought of a non-jewish dominated israel causes the zionists to foam at the mouth...


you know, kinda like the idea of white women dating black men having the same reaction back in the american day.


equality sucks for those who insist upon racist standards.  White men didn't give up their crown any easier than jillian is trying to give up hers.


now ask Ravi about rationalized ethnic national standards since i've put her in a logical paradox of either supporting israel and white american presidents or supporting a single state solution that falls in line with her stance on immigration reform.

i'll be over here pissing in your box of cheerios.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> You tell me.. ARE they ethnically qualified to count or not?  You people sure do bounce from position to position awfully quick.  One day, pals enjoy the same rights and the next day, they simply are not citizens.  the creation of israel is not a fucking Visa, ravi.
> 
> So you tell me.  Are YOU in favor of israel granting pals FULL CITIZENSHIP with all the political potential involved like I AM with latinos in America or not?  Careful of your answer, yo.
> 
> ...



I've never seen you being in favor of granting latino immigrants full citizenship. I must be dreaming.

I see Israel as the creation of the spoils of war. Maybe that's a bit simplistic, but it is the Jews country now and where do we get off telling another country what their immigration policy must be? Should they tell us we must give Texas back to Mexico and grant full citizenship to anyone that asks for it?

I don't think so.

And way to chicken out of discussing the theocracies of Muslim countries and the fact that most of them don't even allow Jews to exist in their country.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Mani, what did you do to earn a pos rep from Shog?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Oh, and Shog, I do actually think you should allow people full citizenship or none at all. It's the in between stuff that screws things up.


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I would pos rep ya, mani but it seems I have to spread it around.
> 
> who is fucking with whome here?  The very thought of a non-jewish dominated israel causes the zionists to foam at the mouth...
> 
> ...





I just think you're being naive or don't grasp the concept of mutual exclusivity.  Either the Jews run Israel or the Muslims run Israel.  Your single state solution might be noble and all in theory, but it just won't work IMO.  And so I vote for the Jews.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I've never seen you being in favor of granting latino immigrants full citizenship. I must be dreaming.
> 
> I see Israel as the creation of the spoils of war. Maybe that's a bit simplistic, but it is the Jews country now and where do we get off telling another country what their immigration policy must be? Should they tell us we must give Texas back to Mexico and grant full citizenship to anyone that asks for it?
> 
> ...




Im all for full rights to latinos who ARE citizens.  You see, white people can't get away with the same type of racism we see in israel today.  Again, ASK JILL if she is as willing to accept an PAL ISRAELI PM as I am a LATINO PRESIDENT.  Care to guess what her answer is?

SPOILS of war?  And yet you tink the US owes Mexico something despite the emancipation of TEXAS?  Come on, Ravi.. you can't dance around consistency like that.  

WHO are we?  uh, the same people who told Germany that they couldn't marginalize jews?  uh, the same people whose pantleg israel hides behind?  uh, the same people who allows a nuclear double standard in the ME?  I could go on.

So, who were we to say anything about SOUTH AFRICA then, Ravi?

Again, before you start handing out lessons about muslim nations you might wanna google iranian jews and their total rejection of their right of return to israel.  


But, again, go ahead and demonize the koran despite the burning bush escuse for the creation of israel.  I've got you pinned on yet another issue where you fall short of giving a fuck about equality.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Oh, and Shog, I do actually think you should allow people full citizenship or none at all. It's the in between stuff that screws things up.



So, be clear, are you FOR or AGAINST the full citizenship of a majority of pals into Israel even if it breaks up a JEWISH monopoly on political authority?

In other words, a SINGLE STATE SOLUTION.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Ravi*
> Should they tell us we must give Texas back to Mexico and grant full citizenship to anyone that asks for it?



Mexico came to terms with its territorial loss almost 200 years ago in case you haven't noticed.

And the US absorbed the entire latino population of Texas, California etc, etc...

Show me Tejanos and Californios living in refugee camps in Mexico or just stop comparing apples to oranges, please.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Im all for full rights to latinos who ARE citizens.  You see, white people can't get away with the same type of racism we see in israel today.  Again, ASK JILL if she is as willing to accept an PAL ISRAELI PM as I am a LATINO PRESIDENT.  Care to guess what her answer is?



Yet we can get away with who we'll grant citizenship to...and some of our reasons for denying it are just as regressive.



> SPOILS of war?  And yet you tink the US owes Mexico something despite the emancipation of TEXAS?  Come on, Ravi.. you can't dance around consistency like that.


I don't think the US owes Mexico anything. That's kind of my point, Israel doesn't owe the Palestinians anything either because it is their country, like it or not.



> WHO are we?  uh, the same people who told Germany that they couldn't marginalize jews?  uh, the same people whose pantleg israel hides behind?  uh, the same people who allows a nuclear double standard in the ME?  I could go on.


The Israelis are denying full citizenship to people. They aren't rounding up FULL citizens and gassing them. There is no comparison.



> So, who were we to say anything about SOUTH AFRICA then, Ravi?
> 
> Again, before you start handing out lessons about muslim nations you might wanna google iranian jews and their total rejection of their right of return to israel.
> 
> ...


I don't care what it says in the bible about this issue. Not sure why you keep bringing that up. And keep bringing up Iranian Jews to show what models of tolerance Muslim countries are.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

manifold said:


> I just think you're being naive or don't grasp the concept of mutual exclusivity.  Either the Jews run Israel or the Muslims run Israel.  Your single state solution might be noble and all in theory, but it just won't work IMO.  And so I vote for the Jews.



what kind of crack baby bullshit is that while we are on the verge of our own first black American president?  Would you also insist that a christian be president?  White landowning men?  if WE can be the icon of pluralistic democracy where rights apply DESPITE ethnic common denominators then it would work in Palisrael too.  Remember, both muslims, jews AND christians once lived there in peace until the creation of israel put an exclusivity on being hebrew.


and you go ahead and vote for a single ethnicity.  I"LL vote for equality.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

José;720446 said:
			
		

> Mexico came to terms with its territorial loss almost 200 years ago in case you haven't noticed.
> 
> And the US absorbed the entire latino population of Texas, California etc, etc...
> 
> Show me Tejanos and Californios living in refugee camps in Mexico or just stop comparing apples to oranges, please.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> So, be clear, are you FOR or AGAINST the full citizenship of a majority of pals into Israel even if it breaks up a JEWISH monopoly on political authority?
> 
> In other words, a SINGLE STATE SOLUTION.



It's not my call. It's not my country. IF it were, and Muslims in general stopped denying the existence of Israel and quit vowing to wipe them off the map, I'd be all for the inclusion and full citizenship. If Muslims ever have the US surrounded and were trying to blow us up and take something that is lawfully ours, I'd have no problem with us booting them out of the country and nuking their asses, either.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

José;720410 said:
			
		

> Now you're just raping History, plain and simple.
> 
> Everybody knows that the first decision the Israeli government took in 1948 was that Palestinian civilians who had fled the warzone would not be allowed to return.
> 
> Since then, any palestinian trying to return to their towns and villages of origin is immediatelly arrested at best and shot at worst.



Those that fled wanted the Israelis to be exterminated.  They fully expected that to happen so that they could return without having to accept the Jews.  There was no reason to believe that their attitude had changed many years later, when their numbers had swelled by several hundred thousand, when they began demands to reclaim their 'homeland'.  To allow them to return now, seven decades later, would require the Israelis to relinquish their majority population and would be a certain and swift death sentence for the Israeli nation.

Again the Palestinians who did not flee Israel but stayed are now enjoying full Israeli citizenship and prosperity that those who hate Israel and would destroy it can only dream of.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

José;720446 said:
			
		

> Mexico came to terms with its territorial loss almost 200 years ago in case you haven't noticed.
> 
> And the US absorbed the entire latino population of Texas, California etc, etc...
> 
> Show me Tejanos and Californios living in refugee camps in Mexico or just stop comparing apples to oranges, please.



Shog is always going on about some silly little movement that convinces him that Mexico is plotting to take over the US. Paranoid ranting, IMO, but real enough to him. Therefore, it was a valid question for me to ask him.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> we can all talk shit.  Maybe you can try addressing my points with more than orchard speak.



I had already addressed your points and got shit in return.  Just a bit of quid pro quo, that's all.


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> what kind of crack baby bullshit is that while we are on the verge of our own first black American president?  Would you also insist that a christian be president?  White landowning men?  if WE can be the icon of pluralistic democracy where rights apply DESPITE ethnic common denominators then it would work in Palisrael too.  Remember, both muslims, jews AND christians once lived there in peace until the creation of israel put an exclusivity on being hebrew.
> 
> 
> and you go ahead and vote for a single ethnicity.  I"LL vote for equality.



I don't see these parallels at all.  But obviously you do.  I wouldn't even say you're comparing apples and oranges since at least they are both fruit.  More like shit-stains and spaceships.  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

*Yet we can get away with who we'll grant citizenship to...and some of our reasons for denying it are just as regressive.*

granting citizenship is a nations prerogative.  When did white people eject latinos from America and tell them that only white christians could ever be president in order to preserve caucasian influence?

*
I don't think the US owes Mexico anything. That's kind of my point, Israel doesn't owe the Palestinians anything either because it is their country, like it or not.*

You are wrong.  Israel OWES pals equality exactly like WE owed our slaves the same goddamn thing.  The Ku Klux Klan was fond of that "like it or not" shit too.

*
The Israelis are denying full citizenship to people. They aren't rounding up FULL citizens and gassing them. There is no comparison.*

There is weather you want to face it or not.  Gas chambers are not the only method of marginalization.  Go ask Mandela, our celebrated South African terrorist.



*
I don't care what it says in the bible about this issue. Not sure why you keep bringing that up. And keep bringing up Iranian Jews to show what models of tolerance Muslim countries are.
*


of COURSE you don't care, ravi.  You willfully ignore the excuse for the creation of isreal that is just as batshit crazy as 72 virgins because you don't want to believe that *gasp* jews can be just as hateful and willing to dominate as anyone else.

I see you haven't googled iranian jews yet.  Gosh.. thats a surprise.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> It's not my call. It's not my country. IF it were, and Muslims in general stopped denying the existence of Israel and quit vowing to wipe them off the map, I'd be all for the inclusion and full citizenship. If Muslims ever have the US surrounded and were trying to blow us up and take something that is lawfully ours, I'd have no problem with us booting them out of the country and nuking their asses, either.



It simply can't happen--If Arabs gained inclusion and full citizenship, the would be no more Israel. It's as simple as that. For Israel to exist it MUST be totally controlled by the jews.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> It's not my call. It's not my country. IF it were, and Muslims in general stopped denying the existence of Israel and quit vowing to wipe them off the map, I'd be all for the inclusion and full citizenship. If Muslims ever have the US surrounded and were trying to blow us up and take something that is lawfully ours, I'd have no problem with us booting them out of the country and nuking their asses, either.




NEITHER was germany OUR fucking country, ravi.. But hey, way to enable.

yea, Ravi.. you sure are a fucking lefty with opinons like that.  You sound like a motherfucking pat buchanan three days after 9/11/01.  Lemme guess... NOW you are all for racial profiling and assuming that OUR muslims are terrorists in training, eh?

see how far you've got to stretch in order to sacrifice your usual humanitarian consideration for the sake of israeli racism?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Shog is always going on about some silly little movement that convinces him that Mexico is plotting to take over the US. Paranoid ranting, IMO, but real enough to him. Therefore, it was a valid question for me to ask him.



uh, yea.. ATZLAN sure is a figment of MY imagination!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> I had already addressed your points and got shit in return.  Just a bit of quid pro quo, that's all.



yup.. because crying apples and oranges sure is IMPRESSIVE!


:yawn:


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

manifold said:


> I don't see these parallels at all.  But obviously you do.  I wouldn't even say you're comparing apples and oranges since at least they are both fruit.  More like shit-stains and spaceships.  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.



riiiiiiiiight...   in an America whose history is 3/4th white dominated where the civil rights era for blacks is only a mere 40 years old and NO ONE predicted a black president EVER and the destruction of the country if so you sure are not dragging your feet trying to avoid the comparison.

suuuuuuuuuuuuuure, dude.


Funny how those with losing arguement ALWAYS insist that apples and oranges voids that mudhole being stomped in their ass.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

*Yet we can get away with who we'll grant citizenship to...and some of our reasons for denying it are just as regressive.*

granting citizenship is a nations prerogative.  When did white people eject latinos from America and tell them that only white christians could ever be president in order to preserve caucasian influence?

*Um, remember the Indians?*

*
I don't think the US owes Mexico anything. That's kind of my point, Israel doesn't owe the Palestinians anything either because it is their country, like it or not.*

You are wrong.  Israel OWES pals equality exactly like WE owed our slaves the same goddamn thing.  The Ku Klux Klan was fond of that "like it or not" shit too.

*Disagree. No comparison as previously explained.*

*
The Israelis are denying full citizenship to people. They aren't rounding up FULL citizens and gassing them. There is no comparison.*

There is weather you want to face it or not.  Gas chambers are not the only method of marginalization.  Go ask Mandela, our celebrated South African terrorist.

*Disagree. No comparison as previously explained.*



*
I don't care what it says in the bible about this issue. Not sure why you keep bringing that up. And keep bringing up Iranian Jews to show what models of tolerance Muslim countries are.
*


of COURSE you don't care, ravi.  You willfully ignore the excuse for the creation of isreal that is just as batshit crazy as 72 virgins because you don't want to believe that *gasp* jews can be just as hateful and willing to dominate as anyone else.

I see you haven't googled iranian jews yet.  Gosh.. thats a surprise.
*
I've already told you, several times, why I believe Israel belongs to the Jews. It matters not at all if it was created by guilt, to appease some biblical tripe, or any other reason. It is legally theirs and that's all that actually matters.*


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I see Israel as the creation of the spoils of war.



Only problem with that theory is that the area in question wasn't conquered by a Jewish army.
It was handed to them along with the weapons to defend it a million times over.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> It simply can't happen--If Arabs gained inclusion and full citizenship, the would be no more Israel. It's as simple as that. For Israel to exist it MUST be totally controlled by the jews.



So you don't believe one day the Muslims will become a reasonable and peaceful people?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> NEITHER was germany OUR fucking country, ravi.. But hey, way to enable.
> 
> yea, Ravi.. you sure are a fucking lefty with opinons like that.  You sound like a motherfucking pat buchanan three days after 9/11/01.  Lemme guess... NOW you are all for racial profiling and assuming that OUR muslims are terrorists in training, eh?
> 
> see how far you've got to stretch in order to sacrifice your usual humanitarian consideration for the sake of israeli racism?



My view on racial profiling has always been do it if there is a clear and present threat. Otherwise, it's just racism.

Pat Buchanan, huh? lol


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> uh, yea.. ATZLAN sure is a figment of MY imagination!



Jose? See what I'm sayin?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> Only problem with that theory is that the area in question wasn't conquered by a Jewish army.
> It was handed to them along with the weapons to defend it a million times over.


The spoils aren't always claimed by force.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> So you don't believe one day the Muslims will become a reasonable and peaceful people?



Certainly not according to a jewish defintion of reasonable and peaceful.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> The spoils aren't always claimed by force.



Then please explain to me how anyone can claim spoils of war. The allies won the war so they can do anything they want with all the land in question?


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Funny how those with losing arguement ALWAYS insist that apples and oranges voids that mudhole being stomped in their ass.



There you go fantasizing about my ass again.  I can't tell you enough times that I just don't swing that way.  And btw:  Women hating queers are particularly loathsome.

just sayin...


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> Then please explain to me how anyone can claim spoils of war. The allies won the war so they can do anything they want with all the land in question?


Sure, why not?


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> So you don't believe one day the Muslims will become a reasonable and peaceful people?



Most Muslims _are _reasonable and peaceful people.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Sure, why not?



Then I guess we are the proud owners of a big chunk of Iraq. Find any old country--invade it and you own it. Screw anyone one who bitches about fairness, legality, previous ownership, etc etc.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> My point was any opinion I post on the Arab Israeli conflict will just be dismissed by many as the opinion of a Jew, even though I am an American, and Christian, and only Part Jewish by blood, and a dual citizen because my mother made me so when I was to young to even have a choice.
> 
> believe me when I say the Arab Israeli conflict has touched my life directly.



Post away, bro. Otherwise I'll assume that you, like Shogun, are a wine-drinking queer as well.

Of course you'll get blasted for bias. It's what makes it all worthwhile.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 16, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> Then I guess we are the proud owners of a big chunk of Iraq. Find any old country--invade it and you own it. Screw anyone one who bitches about fairness, legality, previous ownership, etc etc.



Yeah, those terrorists are big on complaining about fairness, legality, previous ownership when it comes to their asses being chased out of countries they don't belong in.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Most Muslims _are _reasonable and peaceful people.



Right--I hear jews say that all the time .


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

*Yet we can get away with who we'll grant citizenship to...and some of our reasons for denying it are just as regressive.

granting citizenship is a nations prerogative.  When did white people eject latinos from America and tell them that only white christians could ever be president in order to preserve caucasian influence?

Um, remember the Indians?
*

yea, I do.  and THEY REFLECT MY EXACT FUCKING POINT.  WE DONT DO WHAT WAS DONE TO NATIVES ANYMORE BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE THAT EARLY AMERICA WAS RACIST AS FUCK.


*
I don't think the US owes Mexico anything. That's kind of my point, Israel doesn't owe the Palestinians anything either because it is their country, like it or not.*

You are wrong.  Israel OWES pals equality exactly like WE owed our slaves the same goddamn thing.  The Ku Klux Klan was fond of that "like it or not" shit too.

*Disagree. No comparison as previously explained.*


LOL!

there you go with the apples and oranges avoidance, Ravi.


*
The Israelis are denying full citizenship to people. They aren't rounding up FULL citizens and gassing them. There is no comparison.*

There is weather you want to face it or not.  Gas chambers are not the only method of marginalization.  Go ask Mandela, our celebrated South African terrorist.

*Disagree. No comparison as previously explained.*


LOLOLOL!


check mate.


*
I don't care what it says in the bible about this issue. Not sure why you keep bringing that up. And keep bringing up Iranian Jews to show what models of tolerance Muslim countries are.
*


of COURSE you don't care, ravi.  You willfully ignore the excuse for the creation of isreal that is just as batshit crazy as 72 virgins because you don't want to believe that *gasp* jews can be just as hateful and willing to dominate as anyone else.

I see you haven't googled iranian jews yet.  Gosh.. thats a surprise.
*
I've already told you, several times, why I believe Israel belongs to the Jews. It matters not at all if it was created by guilt, to appease some biblical tripe, or any other reason. It is legally theirs and that's all that actually matters.*[/QUOTE]


Hey, bury your head in the sand, yo.  I kinda figured your leftist identity is only, uh, SKIN DEEP.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> So you don't believe one day the Muslims will become a reasonable and peaceful people?



not while they are being subjigated and rationalized away in accordance with your opinion..


Natives, blacks, irish.. you name it.  It's the same damn social pattern.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> My view on racial profiling has always been do it if there is a clear and present threat. Otherwise, it's just racism.
> 
> Pat Buchanan, huh? lol



Pat Buchanan.  yes.


So, it's time to start pulling latinos out into the streets and checking for green cards, eh?


tsk tsk tsk..


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Jose? See what I'm sayin?



Don't you ahve some racial profiling to rationalize as long as it's not applied to your pet ethnicity?

Are you denying the Atzlan movement?  Do you think Jose is going to DENY it?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Most Muslims _are _reasonable and peaceful people.



Maybe most Muslims living in the US.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> The spoils aren't always claimed by force.



and sometimes they are, right?

so, tell me.. After Germany pretty much conquered Europe then how is the holocaust NOT similarly "spoils of war" in line with your goofy excuses for israel?


need to see a map?


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> yup.. because crying apples and oranges sure is IMPRESSIVE!
> 
> 
> :yawn:




At least the metaphor was accurately applied.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> Then I guess we are the proud owners of a big chunk of Iraq. Find any old country--invade it and you own it. Screw anyone one who bitches about fairness, legality, previous ownership, etc etc.



Actually, we could have been the proud owners of Iraq but Bush made a big thing about spreading democracy and having elections, remember? And that would have inflamed the middle east, much like Israel being owned by Jews. 

Kind of a delicate balance, huh? Thoughout history, many countries have been invaded and taken over by the conquering army. I'm surprised that anyone really disputes the legitimacy of this...


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 16, 2008)

Well, except for those who imprison and beat their wives and daughter, and engage in honor killings. And except for those who aid and abet terrorists, and want to see America overthrown and turned into a stronghold for Islam. And except for those who come here to learn to fly and practice military maneuvers to use against infidels....

But hey, the rest of them are great.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

manifold said:


> There you go fantasizing about my ass again.  I can't tell you enough times that I just don't swing that way.  And btw:  Women hating queers are particularly loathsome.
> 
> just sayin...



then you must avoid mirrors like a vampire avoids the sun and a crucifix, eh?


now go post your silly lil poll since the sum total of your input amounts to orchard excuses.


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> then you must avoid mirrors like a vampire avoids the sun and a crucifix, eh?
> 
> 
> now go post your silly lil poll since the sum total of your input amounts to orchard excuses.



That's like the fourth time you've requested I start a poll in your honor.  Ask me one more time and maybe I'll oblige. 

I'm thinking something like:

What does Shogun hate more:

A. Jews
B. Women
C. Himself
D. All of the above


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I declare victory because I haven't convinced you that I'm right*



Well, it was an interesting conversation. I'm kind of up in the air about the conflict between Israel and the Pals but I'll probably always side with Israel. And you continue to convince me that I'm supporting the correct side.

*Sorry for the rule violation. I can't change the color of Shog's fauxly quoted post.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> At least the metaphor was accurately applied.



no, sorry, it really wasn't.  It's a half assed excuse to avoid the weakness of your own position.


YOu can't argue with Nelson Mandela and you sure as hell won't hold jews to the same standard the rest of us abide by so feel free to add your name to the list that my mudhole stomping boot is making walk funny today.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> not while they are being subjigated and rationalized away in accordance with your opinion..
> 
> 
> Natives, blacks, irish.. you name it.  It's the same damn social pattern.



I honestly don't ever recall the natives, the blacks or the irish acting like the Muslims.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Pat Buchanan.  yes.
> 
> 
> So, it's time to start pulling latinos out into the streets and checking for green cards, eh?
> ...


I don't think they present a danger but I'm sure you do.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

manifold said:


> That's like the fourth time you've requested I start a poll in your honor.  Ask me one more time and maybe I'll oblige.
> 
> I'm thinking something like:
> 
> ...



and, im sure, it will be about as profound as the last time you thought a flame zone poll would win a debate out here in the forum.

Hey, don't worry, RAVI will be there to kiss hims little booboo and make it all feew better.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Don't you ahve some racial profiling to rationalize as long as it's not applied to your pet ethnicity?
> 
> Are you denying the Atzlan movement?  Do you think Jose is going to DENY it?


Wait, last week my pet ethnicity was latinos. I'm so confused!!!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Well, it was an interesting conversation. I'm kind of up in the air about the conflict between Israel and the Pals but I'll probably always side with Israel. And you continue to convince me that I'm supporting the correct side.
> 
> *Sorry for the rule violation. I can't change the color of Shog's fauxly quoted post.



It's cool with me, ravi.. I knew your political ideology is as brittle as your grasp on labor laws long ago.  Siding with ANY ethnicity de facto is about as impressive as whites doing the same in the south or germans doing the same in europe...


but you already knew that.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and sometimes they are, right?
> 
> so, tell me.. After Germany pretty much conquered Europe then how is the holocaust NOT similarly "spoils of war" in line with your goofy excuses for israel?
> 
> ...



Did Germany win that war, I've forgotten. Denying full citizenship isn't the same as genocide no matter how you slice it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I honestly don't ever recall the natives, the blacks or the irish acting like the Muslims.



well, then you are balefully stupid, arent you?


Natives scalp, Irish bomb and blacks rioted to their oppressors.


learn some fucking history.


yu can start with Nelson Mandela's reason to kill white south africaners.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Actually, we could have been the proud owners of Iraq but Bush made a big thing about spreading democracy and having elections, remember? And that would have inflamed the middle east, much like Israel being owned by Jews.
> 
> Kind of a delicate balance, huh? Thoughout history, many countries have been invaded and taken over by the conquering army. I'm surprised that anyone really disputes the legitimacy of this...



Inflamed the mideast ????  It would have sent the American left into seizures. They can't even see the legitimacy in the US even being there.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and, im sure, it will be about as profound as the last time you thought a flame zone poll would win a debate out here in the forum.
> 
> Hey, don't worry, RAVI will be there to kiss hims little booboo and make it all feew better.



And then some.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I don't think they present a danger but I'm sure you do.



and I don't consider an israeli PALI prime minister a threat.  

but, im sure you do, eh?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Wait, last week my pet ethnicity was latinos. I'm so confused!!!



Last weeks de facto race WAS latinos.  Now it's jews.  You are not confused so much as historically ignorant.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> well, then you are balefully stupid, arent you?
> 
> 
> Natives scalp, Irish bomb and blacks rioted to their oppressors.
> ...



Last time I checked, before 9/11 we weren't oppressing any Muslims. In fact, we were looking the other way while they forced their women to become lesser creatures than their dogs.

Great bunch you've chosen for your heroes.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Maybe most Muslims living in the US.


The Muslim World
"The Muslim World  

Information and statistics about the Muslim population of the world  


Nearly one in five people in the world today claims the faith of Islam.  A diverse community of believers spans the globe.  Over fifty countries have Muslim-majority populations, while other groups of believers are clustered in minority communities on nearly every continent. 

Although Islam is often associated with the Arab world and the Middle East, fewer than 15% of Muslims are Arab. 

Distribution of Muslims
Africa 308,660,000 27.4% 
Asia 778,362,000 69.1% 
Europe 32,032,000 2.8% 
Latin America 1,356,000 0.1% 
North America 5,530,000 0.5% 
Oceania 385,000 0.0% 
World 1,126,325,000 100% 

Source:  Britannica Yearbook, 1997

Countries with Muslim Populations of 10% or more (1996)
Country # in millions 
Indonesia 182.2 m 
Pakistan 136.9 m 
Bangladesh 115.0 m 
India 108.6 m 
Iran 63.9 m 
Turkey 61.0 m 
Egypt 51.6 m 
Nigeria 40.2 m 
Algeria 29.1 m 
China * 29.1 m 
Morocco 29.1 m 
Iraq 21.4 m 
Sudan 20.4 m 
Ethiopia 18.3 m 
Afghanistan 18.0 m 
Yemen 16.1 m 
Saudi Arabia 16.0 m 
Uzbekistan 15.9 m 
Malaysia 10.5 m 
Mali 9.4 m 
Tunisia 9.0 m 
Somalia 8.5 m 
Senegal 7.7 m 
Niger 7.5 m 
Kazakhstan 6.9 m 
Guinea 6.5 m 
Azerbaijan 6.1 m 
Cote d'Ivoire 5.9 m 
Libya 5.2 m 
Tajikstan 5.2 m 
Burkina Faso 5.0 m 
Jordan 3.6 m 
Syria 3.5 m 
Cameroon 3.1 m 
Turkmenistan 3.1 m 
Chad 2.9 m 
Ghana 2.8 m 
Kyrgyzstan 2.8 m 
Israel (Palestine) 2.4 m 
Mauritania 2.3 m 
Mozambique 2.3 m 
Sierra Leone 2.0 m 
Bosnia 1.8 m 
Serbia 1.8 m 
United Arab Emirates 1.8 m 
Lebanon 1.7 m 
Oman 1.7 m 
Malawi 1.5 m 
Tanzania 1.5 m 
Albania 1.4 m 
Bulgaria 1.3 m 
Brunei 1.2 m 
Kuwait 1.2 m 
Benin 0.95 m 
Gambia 0.94 m 
Togo 0.85 m 
Macedonia 0.59 m 
Bahrain 0.51 m 
Comoros 0.51 m 
Guinea Bissau 0.49 m 
Qatar 0.47 m 
Djibouti 0.45 m 
Singapore 0.44 m 
Liberia 0.40 m 
Maldives 0.25 m 
Mauritius 0.19 m 
Sahara 0.13 m 
Suriname 0.10 m 
Cyprus 0.04 m 
Gibraltar 0.003 m 

* Muslims in China represent 2.4% of the population. "

If most Muslims were not reasonable and peaceful people, don't you think the world would be in a state of major chaos and disorder?


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

Soggy said:
			
		

> and, im sure, it will be about as profound as the last time you thought a flame zone poll would win a debate out here in the forum.



And therein lie the beautiful irony that continually escapes you.  All you care about is winning debates even though you've never actually won one.  I, on the other hand, don't give two shits about winning any debates, just sharing ideas and having a little fun in the process.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and I don't consider an israeli PALI prime minister a threat.
> 
> but, im sure you do, eh?



Nope. I'm not quite sure if you grasp the concept..._Israel is not my country.
_


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Did Germany win that war, I've forgotten. Denying full citizenship isn't the same as genocide no matter how you slice it.



They won Europe hands down.

and yes, marginalizing an ethnicity on the excuse of citizenship IS the same thing.  Again, if you can read a fucking book, ask Nelson Mandela.

If the US ejected all of it's latino population you might have a point.  As it is, you just convey your ignorance.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Last time I checked, before 9/11 we weren't oppressing any Muslims. In fact, we were looking the other way while they forced their women to become lesser creatures than their dogs.
> 
> Great bunch you've chosen for your heroes.



You really hate Muslims, don't you. Too bad you've never known any.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> The Muslim World
> "The Muslim World
> 
> Information and statistics about the Muslim population of the world
> ...



I disagree with you for reasons we discussed before. You are free to think me wrong and I'll continue to think you are. Muslims, IMO, are your pit bull.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> They won Europe hands down.
> 
> and yes, marginalizing an ethnicity on the excuse of citizenship IS the same thing.  Again, if you can read a fucking book, ask Nelson Mandela.
> 
> If the US ejected all of it's latino population you might have a point.  As it is, you just convey your ignorance.



I'm stunned. Europe is controlled by Germany? How come the last time I was in London everyone spoke English?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> You really hate Muslims, don't you. Too bad you've never known any.


I don't hate them, per se. I hate their religion, just like I hate fundamentalist Christian religions. I'm okay with the few I know in this country, but then they never struck me as fundies.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Last time I checked, before 9/11 we weren't oppressing any Muslims. In fact, we were looking the other way while they forced their women to become lesser creatures than their dogs.
> 
> Great bunch you've chosen for your heroes.



Again, you convey how ignorant you really are, ravi.  white people in the US have a long habit of tolorance, eh ravi?




and, given the machisimo culture of mexico and the male dominance in Judaism you ARE one to  talk.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

manifold said:


> And therein lie the beautiful irony that continually escapes you.  All you care about is winning debates even though you've never actually won one.  I, on the other hand, don't give two shits about winning any debates, just sharing ideas and having a little fun in the process.



I win when I send you to the flame zone or make you cry apples and oranges (uncle!), dude.  You may not want to admit or accept that but i'm pwning your position here.


that seems to happen a lot.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Nope. I'm not quite sure if you grasp the concept..._Israel is not my country.
> _



neither was germany.

now, for a full shocker why don't you ask Jillian her feelings on a PALI PM of Israel.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I disagree with you for reasons we discussed before. You are free to think me wrong and I'll continue to think you are. Muslims, IMO, are your pit bull.



well THATS not racist as fuck.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I'm stunned. Europe is controlled by Germany? How come the last time I was in London everyone spoke English?



Before the US stepped in it was.


what year did germany tear down the wall, Ravi? 


Because the US decided to step into WW2 even though, as you'd put it, it wasn't their nation to give a fuck about.

Again, do you need to see a map?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I don't hate them, per se. I hate their religion, just like I hate fundamentalist Christian religions. I'm okay with the few I know in this country, but then they never struck me as fundies.



and here we get to the crux of your position:

HATRED.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I don't hate them, per se. I hate their religion, just like I hate fundamentalist Christian religions. I'm okay with the few I know in this country, but then they never struck me as fundies.



So every Muslim. except for the token few that you know, are fundamentalists?


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> well THATS not racist as fuck.



I'm not sure it's technically racist, but it sure is something not good.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and here we get to the crux of your position:
> 
> HATRED.



You mean like your reasons for wanting Jews subjugated to and killed by Arabs?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

I think it's racist as fuck.  Watch how I substitute ethnicites and you tell me if it's racism:


"I will always support WHITE PEOPLE"

"BLACK PEOPLE"S religion will always make me hate them"

"A BLACK MAN robbed a store and killed the WHITE person, ergo,  BLACKS deserve to count less than WHITES."

"It's a WHITE country and no one is gassing BLACKS so who am I to say anything about inequality?" 



We either apply equality EQUALLY or we let populations make excuses for their marginalized segregation.  I stumped her with the question about Latino Presidents and Pali PMs in israel.  I don't favor anyone automatically.  We are all human and capable of the same range of horrible actions.  If White people carried the same mentality as the enablers in this thread we'd have seen ghost hood accusations pages ago.  To me, this is nothing more than the same racism that caused the phrase, "the only good injun is a dead injun"

and, to be honest, after her last few posts, you can almost hear those same words coming out of her mouth given that they are the EXACT same mentality on the issue of social dominance and reactions to such.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> You mean like your reasons for wanting Jews subjugated to and killed by Arabs?



quote me suggesting such, bitch.  If you can't play ball then don't step up to the plate.


Now that you are here, why don't you tell Ravi just how you feel about the single state solution where equality is extended to more than jews which results in an ISREALI PM that happens to be Palestinian.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> well THATS not racist as fuck.



I didn't know Muslim was a race.

Damn, if you weren't around to set me straight I guess I'd be a moron.


----------



## manifold (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I win when I send you to the flame zone or make you cry apples and oranges (uncle!), dude.  You may not want to admit or accept that but i'm pwning your position here.
> 
> 
> that seems to happen a lot.



Keep telling yourself that.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and here we get to the crux of your position:
> 
> HATRED.



I figured you'd glom on to that. A little gift for you, Soggy.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

it's not a gift to anyone, Ravi.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> So every Muslim. except for the token few that you know, are fundamentalists?



Did I say that? The majority are, IMO.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> I'm not sure it's technically racist, but it sure is something not good.



LOL! I'm sure you got the pit bull reference, doofus.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I didn't know Muslim was a race.
> 
> Damn, if you weren't around to set me straight I guess I'd be a moron.



The generalized standard reflects the root of your racist position, ravi.

play dumb.  I haven't seen that before.


*
Oh, and JILLIAN.. BITCH, did you have a quote yet or is this where you disappear before letting Ravi know just what you think about actual democracy for jews in pals in a single state?*


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Muslim = race
Germany won WW2
Israel gasses Pals

Three things I learned from Shog today.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

José;720305 said:
			
		

> Reality
> 
> You're doing a fantastic job at debunking the arguments of the defenders of ethnic supremacism in Palestine but this part was a real disappointment.
> 
> ...



I completely disagree. Israelis go to the polls and elect a party. Sometimes they have chosen well, other times not so much.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Did I say that? The majority are, IMO.



Well, then you've said it now. And you haven't explained to me how the world, with such an enormous and widespread population of Muslims, is able to remain as stable as it is if all those Muslims are _not _reasonable and peaceful people.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> LOL! I'm sure you got the pit bull reference, doofus.



Of course I got your pit bull reference. But then, you're also ignorant and uninformed on that issue as well.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Well, then you've said it now. And you haven't explained to me how the world, with such an enormous and widespread population of Muslims, is able to remain as stable as it is if all those Muslims are not reasonable and peaceful people.


Reason and peaceful aren't just about wars, Ang. My biggest problem with them is what they do to women. I understand that you don't think it's a big deal, but it is a big deal to me.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Of course I got your pit bull reference. But then, you're also ignorant and uninformed on that issue as well.


Yep, and I intend to keep believing what I believe about pits, too.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I wouldn't like it. However, this seems like an extreme version of an immigration policy so I'm kind of surprised you are against it, knowing how you feel about Mexicans and all.
> 
> You do realize that Jews aren't even allowed to live in most of the countries in the middle east, don't you? That seems much more restrictive and discriminatory to me, yet you seem to have no problem with it.
> 
> Why is that?




Because those countries have enacted prejudicial policies. Those countries haven't taken displaced or PURGED Palestinians either if they can help it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Muslim = race
> Germany won WW2
> Israel gasses Pals
> 
> Three things I learned from Shog today.




PALESTINIAN = muslim = ethnicity

Germany did conquer Europe before the US stepped in.  Do I really need to post a map?

gassing people is not the definition of genocide.  Go read a fucking book one of these days.  


or just ask this guy


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Of course I got your pit bull reference. But then, you're also ignorant and uninformed on that issue as well.



Given your post 308, you might want to reconsider that....


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Reason and peaceful aren't just about wars, Ang. My biggest problem with them is what they do to women. I understand that you don't think it's a big deal, but it is a big deal to me.



It's not that I don't think women's issues aren't a big deal. It's that you seem to think all Muslims are the same and that all Muslims interpret the Koran to call for oppression of women.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Reason and peaceful aren't just about wars, Ang. *My biggest problem with them is what they do to women*. I understand that you don't think it's a big deal, but it is a big deal to me.



oh but yu'll fucking defend mexicans all day long despite their culture.


bravo, ravi.  fucking BRAVO.


also, you might wanna find out a thing or two about women's role in judaism if yuo think you are supporting equality.  It's a fucking joke that you think the jewish faith isn't also rife with sexism.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yep, and I intend to keep believing what I believe about pits, too.



so did white southerners, yo.

make you own bed, i guess.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yep, and I intend to keep believing what I believe about pits, too.



Of course you will. Because you are pig headed.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> so did white southerners, yo.
> 
> make you own bed, i guess.



Your problem, honey, is you seem to get all your issues confused and mixed up....


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> given Your Post 308, You Might Want To Reconsider That....



Have You Found A Quote From Me Yet?


Come On, Jill.. Put Up Or Shut The Fuck Up.  Show Me Where I"ve Ever Wanted To See Dead Jews.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> The Pals aren't full citizens, though, are they? So why should they enjoy the benefits of full citizens? We do the same thing with temporary visas. I'll agree, it causes a lot of trouble to not grant people full citizenship, just take a look at France.
> 
> This thing you keep harping on, about them not being democracies. That doesn't matter in the least. The people in those particular theocratic dictatorships choose that form of government because they believe the Koran mandates it.



Citizenship is the problem. Palestinians don't have any. 

What evidence do you have the Egyptians choose to be subjugated by a dictatorship? Or in Syria? Or in Saudi Arabia?


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> oh but yu'll fucking defend mexicans all day long despite their culture.
> 
> 
> bravo, ravi.  fucking BRAVO.
> ...


 So is the Catholic faith.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> It's not that I don't think women's issues aren't a big deal. It's that you seem to think all Muslims are the same and that all Muslims interpret the Koran to call for oppression of women.


Not all. Most.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Have You Found A Quote From Me Yet?
> 
> 
> Come On, Jill.. Put Up Or Shut The Fuck Up.  Show Me Where I"ve Ever Wanted To See Dead Jews.



Oh...is it that you just spew? You don't think the positions you support have real life ramifications?

What do you think supporting terorrists does? What do you think supporing jews being subjugated to Arabs in Israel would do?

I don't think you're too stupid to put two and two together.... or am I giving you too much credit?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> It's not that I don't think women's issues aren't a big deal. It's that you seem to think all Muslims are the same and that all Muslims interpret the Koran to call for oppression of women.



thats just it.  Apparently, AL muslims abide by sexist beliefs.... but not ALL jews do despite rampant sexism in their faith.


not to mention her mexican hardon despite machisimo.  

But, hey, at least we've established the root of her opinion.  Hell, even JILL won't be that honest.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> oh but yu'll fucking defend mexicans all day long despite their culture.
> 
> 
> bravo, ravi.  fucking BRAVO.
> ...



The whole world is rife with sexism, numnuts. There's nothing I can do to change that. But there's no way in hell I'm going to support a religion that preaches that women be treated like shit.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Given your post 308, you might want to reconsider that....



Maybe you could explain what is to reconsider.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> so did white southerners, yo.
> 
> make you own bed, i guess.



White southerners are against pit bulls? That surprises me.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Your problem, honey, is you seem to get all your issues confused and mixed up....



I'll start giving a fuck about your input after you quote me saying that I want to see dead jews.  Spare me your lecture given your inability to back up your retarded fucking accusations.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Your problem, honey, is you seem to get all your issues confused and mixed up....



DING! We have a winner!


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Maybe you could explain what is to reconsider.



Because muslims have more sectarian violence than any other group even if you take Jews and Christians out of the equation. Shi'a and Sunni need to get along before you can really call them peaceful. And they're far from stable.  There isn't an Arab country (except maybe the UAE) that isn't in danger of being taken over by fundamentalist loonies.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

*
I've already told you, several times, why I believe Israel belongs to the Jews. It matters not at all if it was created by guilt, to appease some biblical tripe, or any other reason. It is legally theirs and that's all that actually matters.*[/QUOTE]

Palestinians had a legal right to their property after the '48 war. They were denied.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> Citizenship is the problem. Palestinians don't have any.
> 
> What evidence do you have the Egyptians choose to be subjugated by a dictatorship? Or in Syria? Or in Saudi Arabia?


Dictatorship may not be the proper word, but it describes the form of government. Theocratic dictatorship perhaps?


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Maybe most Muslims living in the US.



Please publish your study on the reasonableness of the Muslim population of the world.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Oh...is it that you just spew? You don't think the positions you support have real life ramifications?
> 
> What do you think supporting terorrists does? What do you think supporing jews being subjugated to Arabs in Israel would do?
> 
> I don't think you're too stupid to put two and two together.... or am I giving you too much credit?



I consider more REAL LIFE ramifications than that which kissed your jewish ass, bitch.  Like I said, QUOTE ME or shut the fuck up.

Pals are not terrorists just like jews arent all sheisty greedy motherfuckers.  I don't care if your only rebuttal is to cry martyr.  You accused me of wanting to see dead jews so BACK THAT THE FUCK UP WITH EVIDENCE.

No, im not too stupid to put two and two together, which is why it's easy to call you the racist bitch that you are after insinuating something that is antithical to every statement i've ever made about the application of EQUALITY despite ethnicity.  I don't care if you have to share your team jersey for the sake of peace.  Im not the racist one here.


Now, quote me suggesting that i want to see dead jews or shut the fuck up.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> White southerners are against pit bulls? That surprises me.



well, black ones, at least.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Because muslims have more sectarian violence than any other group even if you take Jews and Christians out of the equation.



Per capita?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> DING! We have a winner!



if you say so..


but then, neither your standard or hers is based on anything more than your unyielding blank check support of jews despite having no facts to offer otherwise so..


Hell, by this point its a COMPLIMENT that your ignorant ass thinks so.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> Palestinians had a legal right to their property after the '48 war. They were denied.



Dead wrong, They had there property and then used it to attack into Israel and then lost it, but I am not shocked at all you leave out that detail.

It was the Arabs who refused outright to accept the approved partition and borders and chose to fight instead.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> if you say so..
> 
> 
> but then, neither your standard or hers is based on anything more than your unyielding blank check support of jews despite having no facts to offer otherwise so..
> ...



I honestly don't know where you get your ideas. I have no blank check support of Jews. Why don't you quit getting so emotional about everything and misrepresenting what everyone thinks?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Dead wrong, They had there property and then used it to attack into Israel and then lost it, but I am not shocked at all you leave out that detail.
> 
> It was the Arabs who refused outright to accept the approved partition and borders and chose to fight instead.



of course not.  just like the US wouldn't accept mexico waltzing in and claiming texas and insisting that we accept it.  Losing to a better equipped and western supported israel is beside the point.  If your logic applied, the GERMANY would have been right to KEEP half of fucking europe.


but, hey, SHOCKING that you leave that little point out.  Dont worry, you can assume I want to see dead jews just like jill rather than reply directly to the fact of euro dominating nazi germany


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I honestly don't know where you get your ideas. I have no blank check support of Jews. Why don't you quit getting so emotional about everything and misrepresenting what everyone thinks?



the fuck you don't.. Youve stated as much IN THIS THREAD.


you see, when someone states that "they will always fall on the side of jews" that means more than some wanton fortune cookie epiphany.


----------



## editec (Jul 16, 2008)

José;720307 said:
			
		

> I have no problem stating that Israel has no right to exist, editec.
> 
> Ethnic supremacist states have no right to exist at all, no matter how many times western leaders state otherwise.


 
Okay is that a qualification, a mitigation or what?



> The only "right" racial dictatorships have is the right to be peacefully dismantled and replaced by democratic, secular governments just like in South Africa.


 
Yeah, but South Africa still exists, with White and Black in it, so that isn't the same as simply saying _Isreal should not exist.._

Are you saying that France doesn't have the right to be mostly filled with Frenchies, or Neitherlands the Dutch and and Israel with Jews, or just that Israel should be religiously and ethnically colorblind?

Or are you saying that _any solution is okay_, even causing the genocide of Jews in Isreal, because the nation wasn't created on the up and up and because the Jews are racially biased and therefore don't deserve any SAFE harbor in this world?

Big difference there in meanings, you see?

My point is we sort of have to follow one line of reasoning about one small part of this discussion down to its logical conclusion just so we actually KNOW what the others _mean_ when we say things that can be interpreted many wildly different ways.

We (myself included, because we all love history) always seem to get sidetracked into the WHAT IS FAIR? question, before any of us really GET what the other actually means.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Hey Editec.. when did France, the netherlands or anyone else decide muslims are not equal in their political structure?


Are you going to be just as quick to disregard the ethnic standard of israel?  Does a muslim PM in israel scare you too?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> the fuck you don't.. Youve stated as much IN THIS THREAD.
> 
> 
> you see, when someone states that "they will always fall on the side of jews" that means more than some wanton fortune cookie epiphany.



Yep, you're a moron. I _probably_ will always support Israel, because as far as I can tell they are in the right. If that's a blank check then it's true that you are racist against Jews.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Hey Editec.. when did France, the netherlands or anyone else decide muslims are not equal in their political structure?
> 
> 
> Are you going to be just as quick to disregard the ethnic standard of israel?  Does a muslim PM in israel scare you too?



Where's the Jewish leader of Saudi Arabia?

Damn, you sound ridiculous.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yep, you're a moron. I _probably_ will always support Israel, because as far as I can tell they are in the right. If that's a blank check then it's true that you are racist against Jews.



HA!

yea.. whitewash your hatred, ravi.. racists NEVER do THAT!

hey, calling me a racist as some last resort rebuttal works well for jill so it will probably work for you too.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Where's the Jewish leader of Saudi Arabia?
> 
> Damn, you sound ridiculous.



Saudi arabia isn't a western nation like israel supposedly is.  Like France and the NETHERLANDS ARE.


wow, demonization from a zionist with nothing else to add to the conversation?  SAY it isn't SO!


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> of course not.  just like the US wouldn't accept mexico waltzing in and claiming texas and insisting that we accept it.  Losing to a better equipped and western supported israel is beside the point.  If your logic applied, the GERMANY would have been right to KEEP half of fucking europe.
> 
> 
> but, hey, SHOCKING that you leave that little point out.  Dont worry, you can assume I want to see dead jews just like jill rather than reply directly to the fact of euro dominating nazi germany



There you go with retarded unrelated comparison again, the usual place Dedicated Anti_Israelis go. The UN partitioned the Area not the Jews. It was the arabs who refused to accept it, and wanted it ALL.

Oh wait are you the one who still thinks Germany won the war?

LOL


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> There you go with retarded unrelated comparison again, the usual place Dedicated Anti_Israelis go. The UN partitioned the Area not the Jews. It was the arabs who refused to accept it, and wanted it ALL.
> 
> Oh wait are you the one who still thinks Germany won the war?
> 
> LOL



Im the one who remembers that germany conquered Europe and, according to posted excuses for israel, somehow validates their treatement of the peoples therein.


but hey, when in doubt cry apples and oranges and scream antisemite, right buddy?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Im the one who remembers that germany conquered Europe and, according to posted excuses for israel, somehow validates their treatement of the peoples therein.
> 
> 
> but hey, when in doubt cry apples and oranges and scream antisemite, right buddy?



That is your idea not mine.


----------



## roomy (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> Correction... the land that is now Israel was taken, not given.



The Jews have lived on that land longer than any other race you blithering idiot so in my opinion have a greater historical claim than the Arabs.If you don't know anything about the subject keep your mouth shut.


----------



## Reality (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> The Jews have lived on that land longer than any other race you blithering idiot so in my opinion have a greater historical claim than the Arabs.If you don't know anything about the subject keep your mouth shut.



Of course they were by and large expelled in the 7th century BC, but I guess only people who don't know that are the only ones that know anything.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> Of course they were by and large expelled in the 7th century BC, but I guess only people who don't know that are the only ones that know anything.



7th Century BC? Really? Interesting... 

then how do you explain the occupation by the Romans, the existence of the San Hedrin, and the rise of Jesus and Christianity 700 years later.

Oh right, you couldn't using your incorrect statements.

Learn your history.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> Of course they were by and large expelled in the 7th century BC, but I guess only people who don't know that are the only ones that know anything.



ROFLMAO then how did the Jews kill Christ again?

My god the level of Ignorance on this issue never ceases to amaze me.


----------



## roomy (Jul 16, 2008)

Reality said:


> Your complete lack of understanding of the historical narrative of the region is not really that surprising.
> 
> Read this, stupid.
> 
> ...



We reneged because the lazy cowardly bastards didn't do it 'til the eleventh hour, when they knew the Turks were beat, they thought they could have their cake and eat it, fuck them, they helped the fucking ottomans, you thick twat.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> no, sorry, it really wasn't.  It's a half assed excuse to avoid the weakness of your own position.
> 
> 
> YOu can't argue with Nelson Mandela and you sure as hell won't hold jews to the same standard the rest of us abide by so feel free to add your name to the list that my mudhole stomping boot is making walk funny today.



No, it was to illustrate the absolutely supportable illustration you used for your unsupportable statement.  But it's too far back to go to retrieve it now, so I'll just relate it to your comments re Mandela.  Comparing South Africa as the same kind of situation that exists in Israel is indeed comparing apples to oranges.  Correct that to comparing apples to brick bats.  At least Apples and Oranges are both fruit.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> HA!
> 
> yea.. whitewash your hatred, ravi.. racists NEVER do THAT!
> 
> hey, calling me a racist as some last resort rebuttal works well for jill so it will probably work for you too.



You just keep digging yourself in deeper. If it were Christians acting like the Pals and Iran and Saudi Arabia were acting I'd feel the same thing. 

You are so blinded by some misguided outrage...I can't figure it out. For someone that rails against Christianity to the point of ridiculousness, you are perfectly content to let a more extreme religion be excused from terrorist acts.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> You just keep digging yourself in deeper. If it were Christians acting like the Pals and Iran and Saudi Arabia were acting I'd feel the same thing.
> 
> You are so blinded by some misguided outrage...I can't figure it out. For someone that rails against Christianity to the point of ridiculousness, you are perfectly content to let a more extreme religion be excused from terrorist acts.



And the only possible explanation for that is a greater outrage at the people against whom those extreme acts are directed.

But then he gets confused about why he looks like a hater. Kind of funny, IMO.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> HA!
> 
> yea.. whitewash your hatred, ravi.. racists NEVER do THAT!
> 
> hey, calling me a racist as some last resort rebuttal works well for jill so it will probably work for you too.



Come on, Jillian. It's okay for Muslims to choose their religion and allow their religion to run their country, but it isn't okay for Jews to do it. Because of that word "democracy" or some silly bullshit.

Edit, whoops that was meant as a reply to another post.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> No, it was to illustrate the absolutely supportable illustration you used for your unsupportable statement.  But it's too far back to go to retrieve it now, so I'll just relate it to your comments re Mandela.  Comparing South Africa as the same kind of situation that exists in Israel is indeed comparing apples to oranges.  Correct that to comparing apples to brick bats.  At least Apples and Oranges are both fruit.



oh yes.. because a british colony in south africa that maintained an ethnic standard for whites despite the natives sure ISNT the same damn thing as a british creation of israel doing the same damn thing.


Nelson Mandela's celebrated violent vigilance against tyranny sure ISNT the same damn thing as pals.


nope.  YOU say so, so it must be true.  I mean, you said apples and oranges!


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Come on, Jillian. It's okay for Muslims to choose their religion and allow their religion to run their country, but it isn't okay for Jews to do it. Because of that word "democracy" or some silly bullshit.
> 
> Edit, whoops that was meant as a reply to another post.



lol... I know. S'okay. I get what you're saying. It's that whole western nation thing. Jews should be subjugated to and killed by Hamas and Hezbollah because they should be held to some uber standard of behavior.

Bizarre, IMO.... no, make that retarded.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

SURELY one of you bitches can point out just when democracy became a factor in muslim countries.  More to the point, WHEN did they become "western democracies" like israel claims to be?


i know i know.. I just hate joooos and want to see them all dead blah blah blah blah.

:yawn:


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> lol... I know. S'okay. I get what you're saying. It's that whole western nation thing. Jews should be subjugated to and killed by Hamas and Hezbollah because they should be held to some uber standard of behavior.
> 
> Bizarre, IMO.... no, make that retarded.



Prescott Bush became Hitler's banker when he became Fritz Thyssen's banker. The incredible loot Fritz's father made in steel, coal, and railroads during WWI was hidden in Holland. Shortly afterwards he was looking to spread some in America and opened a front operation through E.R. Harriman in New York City. In fact, reports indicate that the Bush connections to Nazi money continued through 1951.

The reason Auschwitz was located where it was is because that is near where Fritz Thyssen's coal, steel, and railroads were. That made it possible for I.G. Farben to synthesize fuel from coal gasification for the war machine there, which made it also possible to synthesize rubber there. I.G. Farben also made Zyklon B gas, enough to annihilate two million people according to the trial testimony of the Auschwitz camp commander Rudolf Hoess. 
Fritz Thyssen published a book titled "I Paid Hitler" in 1941. It described how Thyssen sponsored the Storm Troopers of Ernst Roehm as early as 1933, allowing them to build up to 4,500,000 strong to take over Germany. But in 1942, even after Pearl Harbor, Prescott Bush and his father-in-law George Herbert Walker, were administering Thyssen's money until forced by the US government to halt (temporarily).


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

which has nothing to do with this thread.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> lol... I know. S'okay. I get what you're saying. It's that whole western nation thing. Jews should be subjugated to and killed by Hamas and Hezbollah because they should be held to some uber standard of behavior.
> 
> Bizarre, IMO.... no, make that retarded.



oh im sure equality IS retarded if it hinders your racist standard for zion, jill.  I mean, why desegregate the US when europe hated ******* too!


----------



## roomy (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Im all for full rights to latinos who ARE citizens.  You see, white people can't get away with the same type of racism we see in israel today.  Again, ASK JILL if she is as willing to accept an PAL ISRAELI PM as I am a LATINO PRESIDENT.  Care to guess what her answer is?
> 
> SPOILS of war?  And yet you tink the US owes Mexico something despite the emancipation of TEXAS?  Come on, Ravi.. you can't dance around consistency like that.
> 
> ...




How about a British president of the USA?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> How about a British president of the USA?




uh, they've ALL been presidents of ENGLISH heritage thus far, dude.


the sad thing is you probably really thought you had a whammy there.

now ask me if id care if a muslim were president of the US.  OR a jew, for that matter.  OR an asian american.  OR a latino american.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> lol... I know. S'okay. I get what you're saying. It's that whole western nation thing. Jews should be subjugated to and killed by Hamas and Hezbollah because they should be held to some uber standard of behavior.
> 
> Bizarre, IMO.... no, make that retarded.



I don't get it either. Seems to me, any country should have a right to make their country the way they want to make it, even if they want a religious theocracy or a communist dictatorship. Democracy isn't just about voting, it's about people governing themselves the way they see fit...as long as they aren't committing genocide or endangering other countries, it shouldn't be anyone's business.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> How about a British president of the USA?



That'll go over his head.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> uh, they've ALL been presidents of ENGLISH heritage thus far, dude.
> 
> 
> the sad thing is you probably really thought you had a whammy there.
> ...




Is that another thinly veiled attempt to say if you don't support Obama you must be a racist?

I am racist alright. Against flaming lefties. Oh wait thats not a race is it. Damn.


----------



## jillian (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I don't get it either. Seems to me, any country should have a right to make their country the way they want to make it, even if they want a religious theocracy or a communist dictatorship. Democracy isn't just about voting, it's about people governing themselves the way they see fit...as long as they aren't committing genocide or endangering other countries, it shouldn't be anyone's business.



Part of the problem is, and I hate to say this, Israel wasn't really ever supposed to survive. When they gave the high grounds and fortresses and defensible positions to the Arabs (who they knew had Soviet weapons), it was expected, like the Grand Mufti said, that the jews would be in the sea in three days.

But the jews f'd that up and kept winning.... which resulted in the political nighmare that's existed ever since, coupled with the Arab leadership's self-interest in keeping it's own beaten down populations focused on an external situation instead of on their own pathetic situations.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I don't get it either. Seems to me, any country should have a right to make their country the way they want to make it, even if they want a religious theocracy or a communist dictatorship. Democracy isn't just about voting, it's about people governing themselves the way they see fit...as long as they aren't committing genocide or endangering other countries, it shouldn't be anyone's business.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


i'll remember that the next time you cry about illegal immigrants in the US!

And, your concept of democracy is hilarious.  DEMOCRACY ISNT ABOUT VOTING, eh?



Main Entry:
    de·moc·ra·cy Listen to the pronunciation of democracy
Pronunciation:
    \di-&#712;mä-kr&#601;-s&#275;\ 
Function:
    noun 
Inflected Form(s):
    plural de·moc·ra·cies
Etymology:
    Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek d&#275;mokratia, from d&#275;mos + -kratia -cracy
Date:
    1576

1 a: *government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections*2: a political unit that has a democratic government3capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States <from emancipation Republicanism to New Deal Democracy C. M. Roberts>4: the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority5: *the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges*


democracy - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary



thanks for playing.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Once again, Shog proves himself an idiot.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Part of the problem is, and I hate to say this, Israel wasn't really ever supposed to survive. When they gave the high grounds and fortresses and defensible positions to the Arabs (who they knew had Soviet weapons), it was expected, like the Grand Mufti said, that the jews would be in the sea in three days.
> 
> But the jews f'd that up and kept winning.... which resulted in the political nighmare that's existed ever since, coupled with the Arab leadership's self-interest in keeping it's own beaten down populations focused on an external situation instead of on their own pathetic situations.



yea jill.. the eternal support of the west since day fucking 1 sure does insinuate that israel was never meant to survive.  Does your martyr routine ever end?

The political nightmare is the result of insisting that pals don't mean shit while jews shit gold.  There would BE NO conflict if palisrael included both peoples instead of your single fucking ethnically cleansed dream state.  This is why the single state solution scares the fuck out of you.  You don't care about peace any more than hitler did.  If you actually DID care about peace then you wouldn't insist in racists policies that disenfranchise a significant population of non jews. 

But, alas, here we are and i just triggered your scarlet A reflex...


:yawn:


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Once again, Shog proves himself an idiot.



yea yea yea.. given how much you have proven to not know about the history of the world, again, i take this as a compliment coming from you.


nelson mandella, bitch.


oh.. ps, I guess you'd assume Mirium webster are antisemites now for bitch slapping your, uh, definition of Democracy?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> That'll go over his head.



HAHAHAHA!

YOU would think so, wouldnt you?


Is this where you pretend to be illiterate enough to keep from having read my reply?


tsk tsk tsk, ravi.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Yep, I called that one right.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Is that another thinly veiled attempt to say if you don't support Obama you must be a racist?
> 
> I am racist alright. Against flaming lefties. Oh wait thats not a race is it. Damn.



wtf?

are you smoking myrrh in a crack pipe now?  Name a single president that wasn't a white dude whose roots come strait from white europe.  


derrr derr derrrrrr... I know I know.. im a joooo hating antisemite.  get it out of your system.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yep, I called that one right.



the dictionary says otherwise, ravi.  


then again, if YOU have a different definiton id love to see it...


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> wtf?
> 
> are you smoking myrrh in a crack pipe now?  Name a single president that wasn't a white dude whose roots come strait from white europe.
> 
> ...





What an idiot you are. Not only do you seem to think we shouldn't treat terrorists like they deserve to be treated, but also you actually think it's racist to not vote for Obama.

I'm kind of guessing he doesn't want anyone to know you support him.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> the dictionary says otherwise, ravi.
> 
> 
> then again, if YOU have a different definiton id love to see it...



I was talking about Roomy's comment. As to the definition of democracy, your posted definition did nothing to disprove what I said.


----------



## roomy (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> uh, they've ALL been presidents of ENGLISH heritage thus far, dude.
> 
> 
> the sad thing is you probably really thought you had a whammy there.
> ...




It's still not allowed.What about an Austrian like Arnie, not allowed, but a Palestinian should be allowed to be president of Israel.Show some class for a change and shut the fuck up.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> wtf?
> 
> are you smoking myrrh in a crack pipe now?  Name a single president that wasn't a white dude whose roots come strait from white europe.
> 
> ...



Man you sure are good at putting words into people mouths arn't you.

What the hell does the fact that all president to date have been white have to do with what I said again?

All I said is you people try and imply that if you do not support Obama you must be racist. 

hey did you know Obama is half white? Oh wait nm this is pointless. I would vote for a conservative Black man or woman in a second. To bad the Liberals make sure to destroy any black man or woman who does not follow their lead.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Man you sure are good at putting words into people mouths arn't you.
> 
> What the hell does the fact that all president to date have been white have to do with what I said again?
> 
> ...



Please don't besmirch liberals by think Shogun is one.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Man you sure are good at putting words into people mouths arn't you.
> 
> What the hell does the fact that all president to date have been white have to do with what I said again?
> 
> ...



Are youfucking kidding me?  YOU just insisted that im slamming mccain supporters by pointing out how many WHITE ENGLISH people have been president.  Indeed, cry bout putting words in your mouth, dude.  

YOU people, eh?  wanna quote me or do I get to kick another disingenuous motherfucker in the eballs today?

I brought up whitey as a direct reply to Roomy's laughable question about a british president, which itself was a reply to my question about a muslim PM for isreal.

Please, do try to keep up in between reaching for the Scarlet A.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Please don't besmirch liberals by think Shogun is one.



says the same person who is all about racial profiling... as long as it's not against mexicans..  not to mention who "will always support jews" regardless of their national ethnic standard.


RICH, ravi.. thats fucking hilarious.


You may wear the t shirt, ravi, but you dont have the slightest clue what it means to be a liberal.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> It's still not allowed.What about an Austrian like Arnie, not allowed, but a Palestinian should be allowed to be president of Israel.Show some class for a change and shut the fuck up.



Arnie wasnt born here.  BUT, Arnie's KIDS who were sure the fuck qualify.  Now, ask me if I give a damn about an Austrian heritage holding the white house.


and yes, if as Charlie says there are 1mm israeli pals who are citizens, then they should have the potential to ascend to their highest political authority.  Now, ask him if that fucks up his quest for a JEWISH israel.


go fuck yourself, brit.  You and your nation are the LAST people to be handing out lessons about class in the subject of colonial domination of natives.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> says the same person who is all about racial profiling... as long as it's not against mexicans..  not to mention who "will always support jews" regardless of their national ethnic standard.
> 
> 
> RICH, ravi.. thats fucking hilarious.
> ...



Impressive. That's five misrepresentations of what I've said in one short post.


----------



## roomy (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Arnie wasnt born here.  BUT, Arnie's KIDS who were sure the fuck qualify.  Now, ask me if I give a damn about an Austrian heritage holding the white house.
> 
> 
> and yes, if as Charlie says there are 1mm israeli pals who are citizens, then they should have the potential to ascend to their highest political authority.  Now, ask him if that fucks up his quest for a JEWISH israel.
> ...



They wouldn't win an election for the presidency just as a muslim will never be the primeminister of Britain.It's called vested interest you twerpish ponce.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha...you hate Brits too, is there anyone except for Arab men that you do like?
It's a good job we do colonize otherwise you and your forefathers might have grown up in a tent in the middle east.Now go cry to mama, she'll dry your eyes and pat your back.Pwned


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> The Jews have lived on that land longer than any other race you blithering idiot so in my opinion have a greater historical claim than the Arabs.If you don't know anything about the subject keep your mouth shut.



What about Jewish converts? And descendants of converts? What about Arab Jews? What about multiracial Jews? In your opinion, do they have any claim to that land and on what basis? 

Do the Celts have a greater historical claim to England than the Anglo-Saxons?


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> oh yes.. because a british colony in south africa that maintained an ethnic standard for whites despite the natives sure ISNT the same damn thing as a british creation of israel doing the same damn thing.
> 
> 
> Nelson Mandela's celebrated violent vigilance against tyranny sure ISNT the same damn thing as pals.
> ...



The difference is 2+ million Palestinian Arabs plus other non-Jewish peoples happily living in Israel with full citizenship privileges and who are not discriminated against despite the fact that they are not Jewish, practice religions other than Jewish, and are represented in the Israeli govenrment.  That certainly does not look like Apartheid to me.

Using your logic, anybody coming to this country should be admitted no questions asked, no Visa required, no denial of admittance because they could not or would not identify themselves or represented a known terrorist organization.

The 'wall' does not separate residents of Israel from residents of Israel.  The 'wall' separates Israel from people pledged to destroy Israel and who have done their damndest in the past to do just that.

If you think THAT is the same kind of situation that Nelson Mandela protested in South Africa, you need a refund on your history tuition.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

And yet he can justify building a fence along the Mexican border and killing people that try to cross.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

yea.. 2+ million who will never see their kind become the head of state due to the racist standard that you refuse to acknowledge.

but hey, there WERE blacks also living in South Africa too.. I guess their aparthied is just a figment of my imagination too.  Apparenlty, it takes xylon B gass chambers to count, in your book.

and yes, according to my logic we shouldnt ASSUME that an ethnicity is a terrorist any more than we should assume blacks are criminals, latinos are illegals, asians have small dicks and jews control the media.  I guess racism is acceptable for faux believers in human rights as long as it's applied to the scapegoat of the day.  You would have looked good in jackboots, im sure.


Pals as a generalized people are no more "pledged" to kill jews than generalized jews are racist zionists.  If you can accept the subjication of a people then so be it.  You aren't the first person wot wrap racism up in a nice pretty bow.


And, if YOU don't realize that even Nelson killed whitey in backlash of his dominated ethnic group then perhaps you shouldn't be telling me about the value of my education.


Guerrilla activities

In 1961, Mandela became the leader of the ANC's armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe (translated as Spear of the Nation, also abbreviated as MK), which he co-founded. He coordinated a sabotage campaign against military and government targets, and made plans for a possible guerrilla war if sabotage failed to end apartheid. Mandela also raised funds for MK abroad, and arranged for paramilitary training, visiting various African governments.

Fellow ANC member Wolfie Kadesh describes the bombing campaign led by Mandela: "When we knew that we going to start on December 16, 1961, to blast the symbolic places of apartheid, like pass offices, native magistrates courts, and things like that ... post offices and ... the government offices. But we were to do it in such a way that nobody would be hurt, nobody would get killed." [8] Mandela said of Wolfie: "His knowledge of warfare and his first hand battle experience were extremely helpful to me."[2]

Mandela explains the move to embark on armed struggle as a last resort, when increasing repression and violence from the state convinced him that many years of non-violent protest against apartheid had achieved nothing and could not succeed.[9][2]

A few decades later, MK did wage a guerrilla war against the regime, especially during the 1980s, in which many civilians were killed. Mandela later admitted that the ANC, in its struggle against apartheid, also violated human rights, and has sharply criticised attempts by parts of his party to remove statements supporting this fact from the reports of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.[10]

Up until July 2008, Mandela and ANC party members were barred from entering the United States &#8212;except the United Nations headquarters in Manhattan&#8212; without a special waiver from the US Secretary of State, due to their designation as terrorists by the former South African apartheid regime.[11][12]

Nelson Mandela - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

Black South Africans = natives kept against their will in pseudo republics called Bantustans by the white government.

Palestinian arabs = natives kept against their will in Gaza and the West Bank by the jewish government.

Israel is a racist dictatorship by any conceivable definition.

Unfortunately, you're too dumb to realise that palestinians in Israel are token arabs just like the handful of blacks who were citizens of South Africa.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

*Having said this, I must deal immediately and at some length with the question of violence. Some of the things so far told to the Court are true and some are untrue. I do not, however, deny that I planned sabotage. I did not plan it in a spirit of recklessness, nor because I have any love of violence. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation that had arisen after many years of tyranny, exploitation, and oppression of my people by the Whites.*

Mandela

Nelson Mandela Speech - I am Prepared to Die


Only through hardship, sacrifice and militant action can freedom be won. The struggle is my life. I will continue fighting for freedom until the end of my days. 

frontline: the long walk of nelson mandela: the revolutionary: the black pimpernel

The MK carried out numerous bombings of military, industrial, civilian and infrastructural sites. The tactics were initially geared solely towards sabotage, but eventually expanded to include urban guerrilla warfare, which included human targets. Notable among these were the 8 January 1982 attack on the Koeberg nuclear power plant near Cape Town, coinciding with the 70th anniversary of the formation of the ANC, the Church Street bombing on 20 May 1983, killing 19, and the 14 June 1986 car-bombing of Magoo's Bar in Durban, in which 3 people were killed and 73 injured. The total number of people killed or injured in the 30 years of MK's campaigns is not known exactly. MK alone was not a military threat to the apartheid state, but the ANC leadership saw MK as the armed component of a strategy of "people's war" that was primarily geared towards mobilizing mass political support.

MK suspended operations on 1 August 1990 in preparation for the dismantling of apartheid, and was finally integrated into the South African National Defence Force by 1994.

Umkhonto we Sizwe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


HERE is my evidence.

where is yours?


----------



## roomy (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> What about Jewish converts? And descendants of converts? What about Arab Jews? What about multiracial Jews? In your opinion, do they have any claim to that land and on what basis?
> 
> Do the Celts have a greater historical claim to England than the Anglo-Saxons?



I believe they are encouraged to move to Israel.

Britain was a tribal nation, many have laid claim but it always remains England regardless of ruler.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Arnie wasnt born here.  BUT, Arnie's KIDS who were sure the fuck qualify.  Now, ask me if I give a damn about an Austrian heritage holding the white house.
> 
> 
> and yes, if as Charlie says there are 1mm israeli pals who are citizens, then they should have the potential to ascend to their highest political authority.  Now, ask him if that fucks up his quest for a JEWISH israel.
> ...



Wow I guess you are not only a raging Anti_Israel and Anti-semite. Seems you have plenty of hate to go around.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

jillian said:


> Part of the problem is, and I hate to say this, Israel wasn't really ever supposed to survive. When they gave the high grounds and fortresses and defensible positions to the Arabs (who they knew had Soviet weapons), it was expected, like the Grand Mufti said, that the jews would be in the sea in three days.
> 
> But the jews f'd that up and kept winning.... which resulted in the political nighmare that's existed ever since, ....


Interesting. The more you look into what led to the current day situation, the more complicated the issue becomes.  





jillian said:


> coupled with the Arab leadership's self-interest in keeping it's own beaten down populations focused on an external situation instead of on their own pathetic situations.


A universal tried and true tactic for suppression of the poor.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Interesting. The more you look into what led to the current day situation, the more complicated the issue becomes.
> A universal tried and true tactic for suppression of the poor.



Yep, and a common tactic of the left in America, makes me wonder why Jillian is so keen on Obama.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> I believe they are encouraged to move to Israel.
> 
> Britain was a tribal nation, many have laid claim but it always remains England regardless of ruler.



I know they are encouraged. But what claim do _they_ have? My point is so what if your ancestors came from somewhere? Everyone's ancestors came from somewhere.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

roomy said:


> I believe they are encouraged to move to Israel.
> 
> Britain was a tribal nation, many have laid claim but it always remains England regardless of ruler.



yea.. tell that to Ireland and Scotland.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Yep, and a common tactic of the left in America, makes me wonder why Jillian is so keen on Obama.



"of the left"?????


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Shogun said:


> yea.. tell that to Ireland and Scotland.



Don't forget the Welsh!!


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> "of the left"?????



not sure what you are asking.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

duh.. everyone KNOWS that mccain and lieberman are the way to go if we want to see isreals western bulldog attack iran!


only antisemites vote democrat, dont they, chuck?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 16, 2008)

*Under Apartheid, racist beliefs were enshrined in law and any criticism of the law was suppressed. Apartheid was racism made law. It was a system dictated in the minutest detail as to how and where the large black majority would live, work and die. This system of institutionalized racial discrimination defied the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In 1976 the United Nations unanimously condemned the elevation of one of the "homelands", Transkei, into an independent State because it remained dependent on South Africa. Not one country in the world recognized the new State. In 1982, almost one million black South Africans were transferred to another country -- Swaziland -- without their having any say in the matter. 
*

Apartheid and South Africa


----------



## Anguille (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> not sure what you are asking.



It sounds like you are saying the tactic is used by the left for suppression of the poor.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

Anguille said:


> It sounds like you are saying the tactic is used by the left for suppression of the poor.



that is what I was saying. The left does not want to help the poor, they just want to keep them poor, so they will keep voting for the left.

Don't think I am trying to say the right is any better when it comes to the poor. I just can see that both sides could give a rats ass about the poor, other than to use them as a tool to gain power.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> that is what I was saying. The left does not want to help the poor, they just want to keep them poor, so they will keep voting for the left.
> 
> Don't think I am trying to say the right is any better when it comes to the poor. I just can see that both sides could give a rats ass about the poor, other than to use them as a tool to gain power.



sigh...that's silly, Charles. The left is at least smart enough to realize that most poor people don't vote.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Ravi said:


> sigh...that's silly, Charles. The left is at least smart enough to realize that most poor people don't vote.



I gotta wait for the latest description of "poor" before I decide to vote. It changes a lot and I would hate to fuck up the trend.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> Are you saying that France doesn't have the right to be mostly filled with Frenchies, or Neitherlands the Dutch and and Israel with Jews, or just that Israel should be religiously and ethnically colorblind?



What Im saying is that no ethnic group has the right to deny another racial group their right to live in their historical homeland.



> Originally posted by *editec*
> Or are you saying that any solution is okay, even causing the genocide of Jews in Isreal, because the nation wasn't created on the up and up and because the Jews are racially biased and therefore don't deserve any SAFE harbor in this world?



Im all for protecting the jewish people against ethnic discrimination, editec, but keeping the native people of Palestine corralled on arab reservations is not the right way to go about it.

If the price to be paid for the safety of the jewish people is the discrimination of the arab people of Palestine then you might just as well join the KKK.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> Or are you saying that any solution is okay, even causing the genocide of Jews in Isreal.



Now you&#8217;ve touched one of the crucial issues of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, editec.

How to create a non confessional, democratic state in Palestine without turning the Palestinian people into the oppressors of their former oppressors?

No one in his right mind wants to see jewish soldiers suddenly opening the gates and allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians into Israel.

We all know this East/West Germany scenario is totally unrealistic after 60 years of ethnic supremacism in Palestine.

The peaceful dismantlement of Israel will require the establishment of an international protectorate in Palestine where foreign troops will guarantee the safety of both ethnic groups.

The absolute requirement to begin the process of democratisation of Palestine would be the complete dismantling of all fundamentalist political parties and groups, jewish and arab alike, since they all preach racial supremacism. Only parties promoting racial equality and tolerance would be allowed.

Before the new state begins to allow palestinian families to settle in Western Palestine, the jewish and arab population will have to be bombarded by a massive propaganda campaign emphasising racial tolerance, secularism, democracy, civic values etc, etc, etc...

In addition to this, it would be necessary to create national commisions following the model of the south african &#8220;*Truth and Reconciliation Commision*&#8221; to promote forgiveness and reconciliation between the two ethnic groups.

The settlement of palestinian families in Western Palestine and jewish families in Eastern Palestine will have to be a gradual and orderly process, under international control, in order to avoid the same ethnic strife that started this whole conflict more than half a century ago.

Whenever jewish and palestinian individuals/families manifest the desire to live in what was formerly known as Israel, West Bank and Gaza, the authorities will conduct a thorough background check to see if they have even the slightest connection with disbanded fundamentalist movements. Any family with this kind of past connections would have to undergo additional studies on civic values and would be closely monitored by the authorities.

Palestine would be governed by a coalition government formed by an equal number of jewish and palestinian leaders and all major decisions at the federal level would have to be approved by the international community.

After many years (or maybe even decades) of healing and reconciliation between the two ethnic groups, the dismantlement of the international protectorate could be considered and would only be implemented after an unanimous decision of all the leaders of the jewish and arab communities and under the explicit condition that it would be immediately reinstated at the request of any ethnic group.

This international protectorate would always have the safety of the jewish population as an overriding priority, to which everything else, including the palestinian right of return would be subordinated.


----------



## José (Jul 16, 2008)

Just take a look at jillians grotesque misrepresentation of people who support a single democratic state in Palestine, editec:

*What do you think putting an Arab majority in control of a Jewish minority in Israel would mean.

Jews should be subjugated and extinguished by Muslims in yet another Arab State, but he's not an anti-semite, right?*

What kind of stupidity is that?

Jillianism?

Foxfyreanism?

Idiotism?

I have already presented the proposal of an international protectorate in Palestine to the members of this board but they continue to ignore it and refer to this grotesque misrepresentation of my opinions.

Super patriotic american clowns, like Foxfyre, and racist jewish women, like jillian, know perfectly well they support a state racist to the bone and the only way to justify ethnic supremacism in Palestine is to create this strawman argument and atribute it to people like me and Shogun (and even you).

When people feel the need to ignore reasonable ideas and turn them into insanities that no one is actually proposing to win a discussion, this is a good indication that they have already lost the debate and still havent noticed it.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

José;721218 said:
			
		

> Just take a look at jillians grotesque misrepresentation of people who support a single democratic state in Palestine, editec:
> 
> *What do you think putting an Arab majority in control of a Jewish minority in Israel would mean.
> 
> ...




There are no reasonable people left in the mideast. It's all high emotion and insane rhetoric.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 16, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> There are no reasonable people left in the mideast. It's all high emotion and insane rhetoric.



Wow what a rediculas and ignorant generalization.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 16, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Wow what a rediculas and ignorant generalization.



ya--but not that far off. I bet that they will even admit that things have gotten so out of hand that's impossible to solve. I don't hear a lot of hope coming aout of that area. How about you ? Peace and brotherhood on the horizon or is there too much hate to even have hope ?


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 17, 2008)

José;721218 said:
			
		

> Just take a look at jillian&#8217;s grotesque misrepresentation of people who support a single democratic state in Palestine, editec:
> 
> *What do you think putting an Arab majority in control of a Jewish minority in Israel would mean.
> 
> ...



Well now as you seem to have resorted to the typical ignorant leftwing radical tactic of turning your attack on the messenger--one sure tactic to automatically make you the loser in any formal debate--I am safe in declaring Jillian and me co-victors on this one.  (Of course that was already a given when you alluded to Shogun as having a reasoned argument on this issue and allied yourself with him. )


----------



## Rhys (Jul 17, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Well now as you seem to have resorted to the typical ignorant leftwing radical tactic of turning your attack on the messenger--one sure tactic to automatically make you the loser in any formal debate--I am safe in declaring Jillian and me co-victors on this one.  (Of course that was already a given when you alluded to Shogun as having a reasoned argument on this issue and allied yourself with him. )



In the context, that is a remarkable statement.   Having read this long correspondence as carefully as I can, I'd say that Shogun is not only reasonable but knows how to construct an argument, as does José,  whereas once Jillian has stuttered out the bit about 'Auntie C might', that's her finished.   It might have been possible to make some sort of argument for a zionist state within Palestine if the zionists hadn't denied not only the rights but the _existence_ of the Palestinians, hadn't lied themselves blue in the face, never apologised for even the worst of their racist atrocities and, most of all, _always attacked the accuser rather than answer the accusation_.   It is just like the stalinists - once you have got used to suppressing criticism (using the GPU or AIPAC) you lose the trick of democratic argument and can merely shout personal abuse and try to get the critic silenced.   Pity.   Back in the days when I supported zionism I used to be able to do better than that, however poor the argument.   Then I met some Palestinians!


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 17, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> that is what I was saying. The left does not want to help the poor, they just want to keep them poor, so they will keep voting for the left.
> 
> Don't think I am trying to say the right is any better when it comes to the poor. I just can see that both sides could give a rats ass about the poor, other than to use them as a tool to gain power.






Charles_Main said:


> Wow what a rediculas and ignorant generalization.



...


----------



## editec (Jul 17, 2008)

José;721211 said:
			
		

> What I&#8217;m saying is that no ethnic group has the right to deny another racial group their right to live in their historical homeland.


 
The _right?_ What right have I to live in the USA, then?



> I&#8217;m all for protecting the jewish people against ethnic discrimination, editec, but keeping the native people of Palestine corralled on &#8220;arab reservations&#8221; is not the right way to go about it.


 
"not the right way" as in it's immoral, or "not the right way" as in ineffective?



> If the price to be paid for the safety of the jewish people is the discrimination of the arab people of Palestine then you might just as well join the KKK.


 


But thus far, you have made no suggestion as it regards Israel, which would have an outcome that doesn't lead to the end of Israel and probably the slaughter of Israelis by the Palestinians seeking revenge.

And that, I think, is what is driving Jillian a tad nuts. Nobody is acknowledging the reality that exists _right now._

It is all very well and good to come to the conclusion that the Palestians are getting screwed and that the legal or moral arguments for the creation of Israel are dubious.

History shows those of us who look at it honestly that that is the case.

But then, too history shows us *that is the case in the history of damned near every nation in existence,* doesn't it? 

That is certainly the case in the development of the United States, for example. We did most definitely descriminate agains the Indians *for 400 years and counting, agreed?*

But Israel exists as a state NOW, *and the people there have to find a solution that works,* and thus far, you have not found that path to making that happen, and neither have I. 

DEMANDING that the Israelis MUST BE MORE MORAL than every other nation on earth really is a not very good argument, I think.

Expecting Israel to commit national suicide because their nation exists based on land theft isn't a very good argument, either.

Now, remember, I totally agree that Israel, like most nations, STOLE ITS LAND and SCREWED THE ORGINAL INHABITANTS, TOO. (I say this so that you don't try to give me a history lesson. I know my history)

But those injustices are not good arguments for national suicide.

I'm not about to allow an Amerinidan to kill me and my family and to dissolve the US, _now_, because we screwed the AmerIndians.

_Are you?_


----------



## Reality (Jul 17, 2008)

jillian said:


> 7th Century BC? Really? Interesting...
> 
> then how do you explain the occupation by the Romans, the existence of the San Hedrin, and the rise of Jesus and Christianity 700 years later.
> 
> ...



Under the Romans... isn't that one of the anti-Arab self-determination talking points? There was never an Arab administration. Well there hasn't been a Jewish administration for 2500 years. Thats not a right for Jews of today to colonize against the will of the population.


----------



## Reality (Jul 17, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> not sure what you are asking.



Its a reference to your clear bias on the topic. Its a tactic of the strong, whomever they are, used against the weak.


----------



## Reality (Jul 17, 2008)

José;721215 said:
			
		

> Now youve touched one of the crucial issues of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, editec.
> 
> How to create a non confessional, democratic state in Palestine without turning the Palestinian people into the oppressors of their former oppressors?
> 
> ...



Some elements of your thoughts sound much like Taif.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 17, 2008)

editec said:


> The _right?_ What right have I to live in the USA, then?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



ie---you can justify any behavior by claiming it's in the interest of national security ?  Maybe if countries would just admit they treat people like shit because they are afraid of being scalped we would have a great starting point to work from.


----------



## editec (Jul 17, 2008)

*Originally Posted by José* 

 
_



			Now youve touched one of the crucial issues of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, editec.
		
Click to expand...

_


> _How to create a non confessional, democratic state in Palestine without turning the Palestinian people into the oppressors of their former oppressors?_


 
_*Yes, this is the solution we should ALL be seeking.*_

_



			No one in his right mind wants to see jewish soldiers suddenly opening the gates and allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians into Israel.
		
Click to expand...

_


> _We all know this East/West Germany scenario is totally unrealistic after 60 years of ethnic supremacism in Palestine._


 
_Oh, good, You aren't nuts. _

_



			The peaceful dismantlement of Palestine will require the establishment of an international protectorate in Palestine where foreign troops will guarantee the safety of both ethnic groups.
		
Click to expand...

_ 
_Trying to convince the Israelis that they can depend on international protection sort of flew out the window during the years 1933 -1945, sport_

_



			The absolute requirement to begin the process of democratisation of Palestine would be the complete dismantling of all fundamentalist political parties and groups, jewish and arab alike, since they all preach racial supremacism. Only parties promoting racial equality and tolerance would be allowed.
		
Click to expand...

_ 
_I doubt you'll be able to get either the Jews or the Arabs to agree to international control of the land. the BRITISH tried that and filed miserable, already, remember?_

_



			Before the new state begins to allow palestinian families to settle in Western Palestine, the jewish and arab population will have to be bombarded by a massive propaganda campaign emphasising racial tolerance, secularism, democracy, civic values etc, etc, etc...
		
Click to expand...

_ 
_Good idea, that won't work._

_



			In addition to this, it would be necessary to create national commisions following the model of the south african *Truth and Reconciliation Commision* to promote forgiveness and reconciliation between the two ethnic groups.
		
Click to expand...

_


> _The settlement of palestinian families in Western Palestine and jewish families in Eastern Palestine will have to be a gradual and orderly process, under international control, in order to avoid the same ethnic strife that started this whole conflict more than half a century ago._
> 
> _Whenever jewish and palestinian individuals/families manifest the desire to live in what was formerly known as Israel, West Bank and Gaza, the authorities will conduct a thorough background check to see if they have even the slightest connection with disbanded fundamentalist movements. Any family with this kind of past connections would have to undergo additional studies on civic values and would be closely monitored by the authorities._
> 
> ...


 
_Okay, I get it now._

_Your plans are moral, they are good and they won't work._

_Want to know why?_

_Because people are not moral, they are not good, and they will not work for justice, when they still think they can get something better than justice._


----------



## editec (Jul 17, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> ie---you can justify any behavior by claiming it's in the interest of national security ? Maybe if countries would just admit they treat people like shit because they are afraid of being scalped we would have a great starting point to work from.


 
I just did.

Okay, what now?


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 17, 2008)

editec said:


> I just did.
> 
> Okay, what now?



You admitting it and COUNTRIES admitting a two different things dont you think ?


----------



## editec (Jul 17, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> You admitting it and COUNTRIES admitting a two different things dont you think ?


 
Yes it is.

I take no responsibility for countries (or the partisans who love them) which make shit up to excuse their actions.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 17, 2008)

It's hilarious that the same people who insist that a single state solution will never work have been so guided by the phrase, "If you will it, it is no dream".  Lot's of people thought the same thing about the creation of Israel.  It's not so much that it cant happen, you just don't want it to.  therein lies your rub.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 17, 2008)

Rhys said:


> In the context, that is a remarkable statement.   Having read this long correspondence as carefully as I can, I'd say that Shogun is not only reasonable but knows how to construct an argument, as does José,  whereas once Jillian has stuttered out the bit about 'Auntie C might', that's her finished.   It might have been possible to make some sort of argument for a zionist state within Palestine if the zionists hadn't denied not only the rights but the _existence_ of the Palestinians, hadn't lied themselves blue in the face, never apologised for even the worst of their racist atrocities and, most of all, _always attacked the accuser rather than answer the accusation_.   It is just like the stalinists - once you have got used to suppressing criticism (using the GPU or AIPAC) you lose the trick of democratic argument and can merely shout personal abuse and try to get the critic silenced.   Pity.   Back in the days when I supported zionism I used to be able to do better than that, however poor the argument.   Then I met some Palestinians!



My comment was not directed at opposing points of view nor will you ever find a post of mind complaining about anybody presenting an argument different or opposing or rebutting mine.  My comment was directed at a member who had abandoned any attempt to make a reasoned argument but rather resorted to angry ad hominem snipes calling members by name.  Whenever somebody is so out of ammunition that ad hominem slurs is all he or she has left, in my opinion he or she loses the debate.

Shogun, however unsupportable or defensible most of his argument is, does hang in there like a terrior.  But since he has also resorted to ad hominem barbs in the course of this debate, I knew he was out of real ammo many pages before my post that you are objecting to.  He got dragged into my post because the member I was referencing chose to intentionally ally himself with Shogun.

For the record, I personally know more Palestinians than I know Israelis.  They are pleasant, agreeable people.  Their leadership however remains on the record as denying Israel's right to exist and pledging to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth.  Those former Palestinian Arabs who accepted Israel--between 1 and 2 million of them in that tiny country--happily prosper there as full Israeli citizens with all rights enjoyed by Israeli citizens.

At such time as the non-Israeli Palestinians agree that Israel has a right to exist, denounce and punish terrorist activity directed at Israel, and pledge to be good neighbors to Israel, and Israel does not reciprocate by becoming good neighbors to the Palestinians, then and only then will I take the Palestinians' side.  Until then, Israel has every right to use whatever means is necessary to defend its people against people attempting to kill, maim, destroy, and drive them out.

The day you cannot let your children out of your sight for fear that they will be kidnapped or firebombed or hit by a randomly fired rocket intended to kill or maim them, you might rethink your position on this.


----------



## Reality (Jul 17, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> My comment was not directed at opposing points of view nor will you ever find a post of mind complaining about anybody presenting an argument different or opposing or rebutting mine.  My comment was directed at a member who had abandoned any attempt to make a reasoned argument but rather resorted to angry ad hominem snipes calling members by name.  Whenever somebody is so out of ammunition that ad hominem slurs is all he or she has left, in my opinion he or she loses the debate.



Well said!



> Their leadership however remains on the record as denying Israel's right to exist and pledging to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth.



Arafat exchanged letters of acknowledgeable with Rabin. Abass was elected by the majority of the Palestinian people on the basis of a two state solution plan. 



> At such time as the non-Israeli Palestinians agree that Israel has a right to exist, denounce and punish terrorist activity directed at Israel, and pledge to be good neighbors to Israel, and Israel does not reciprocate by becoming good neighbors to the Palestinians, then and only then will I take the Palestinians' side.  Until then, Israel has every right to use whatever means is necessary to defend its people against people attempting to kill, maim, destroy, and drive them out.
> 
> The day you cannot let your children out of your sight for fear that they will be kidnapped or firebombed or hit by a randomly fired rocket intended to kill or maim them, you might rethink your position on this.



Why don't you think Palestinians live with the same daily terror as Israelis?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 17, 2008)

UNSUPPORTABLE?  Indeed, IM the one posted evidence, yo.  what the hell have you posted?  I love how you people seem to think that your dour, baseless opinions mean anything while I have been routinely reminding you of every other similar example of social repression that causes your half assed "apples and oranges" reply.  I stick around because you have yet to offer anything besides, "cant happen", "antisemite" and "Orchard excuses".  You ignore the fact of Nelson's terrorism, native American scalping, irish bombing, etc etc and pretend that israel is some mythical culture that is impervious to historic reflection.  Do I call people names?  Sure.  Does this make your input of stricly opinons any LESS limp in this debate? nope.  If you had a point to offer you'd have done so by now.  As it is, youd rather get wrapped up in my fun little game of lampooning your baseless opinions and hoping that a scarlet letter is a good substitute for actual reasons to support an ethnic standard in a supposedly western nation.  if you cant similarly tell me that you support a perpetuated white power structure in the US then you have no grounds to support a yiddish one in israel without racism.  Consistency is a bitch even if your messiah was jewish.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 17, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> For the record, I personally know more Palestinians than I know Israelis.  They are pleasant, agreeable people.  Their leadership however remains on the record as denying Israel's right to exist and pledging to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth.  Those former Palestinian Arabs who accepted Israel--between 1 and 2 million of them in that tiny country--happily prosper there as full Israeli citizens with all rights enjoyed by Israeli citizens.
> 
> At such time as the non-Israeli Palestinians agree that Israel has a right to exist, denounce and punish terrorist activity directed at Israel, and pledge to be good neighbors to Israel, and Israel does not reciprocate by becoming good neighbors to the Palestinians, then and only then will I take the Palestinians' side.  Until then, Israel has every right to use whatever means is necessary to defend its people against people attempting to kill, maim, destroy, and drive them out.
> 
> The day you cannot let your children out of your sight for fear that they will be kidnapped or firebombed or hit by a randomly fired rocket intended to kill or maim them, you might rethink your position on this.



The zionists have, since 2000, killed 982 Palestinian children to 118 settler children killed.   Why has 'Israel' the right to exist, any more than South africa under the Nationalists, the current regime in Sudan, Chinese control of 
Tibet or - come to that - Nazi Germany?   The _people_ have the right to exist, the racist government not.   The terrorist activity in Palestine comes from the colonists, who hugely outdo the Resistance in frightfulness, and constantly thieve Palestinian property.

Obviously nobody _really_ intends to wipe anyone of the face of the earth, and the incredibly long-suffering Palestinians will doubtless come to some agreement when they are allowed to return to their property and be compensated for the gruesome crimes of the occupation authorities.   

If someone threw you out of your country and killed your relatives you would  doubtless, like the rest of you saintly Americans, give up your holy guns and go quietly to Mexico or Canada to live on hay.   We nasty rough outsiders are different.   If someone stole my country, renamed it Lower Slobovia and settled it with people from Naples on the grounds that it once belonged to the Roman Empire, I should _fight _, as would any normal person.   The idea that zionist settlers are somehow more valuable than native people is straight racism, surely?


----------



## José (Jul 17, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> My comment was directed at a member who had abandoned any attempt to make a reasoned argument but rather resorted to angry ad hominem snipes calling members by name.



Did I really abandon any attempt to make a reasoned argument?

And this is coming from the guy who wasnt able to come up with a single counter argument to my idea of an international protectorate in Palestine!!!

Editec considered my plan well-intentioned but doomed to fail due to human nature.

Reality compared with the Lebanese peace process (Taif accords).

What about Foxfyres input??

Nothing, zero, zip, nada!!

Come on, Foxfyre...

Dont be a sore loser, swallow your pride and recognise what the entire board already knows:

*JOSÉ BLEW UP YOUR ASS REAL GOOD!!!!!*


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 17, 2008)

Reality said:


> Well said!?



Well thank you, especially after you gave me negative rep claiming it dishonest when I objected to being criticized for saying the exact same thing.




> Arafat exchanged letters of acknowledgeable with Rabin. Abass was elected by the majority of the Palestinian people on the basis of a two state solution plan.



The original UN resolution was based on a two state solution plan which the Palestinians rejected.  As they have rejected every subsequent negotiation to solve the problem.  Arafat gave it lip service but he never asked for ratification from his Fatah Party nor did he make any effort to disband or stand down the PLO and the periodic terrorist attacks it carried out with deadly regularity. Arafat never wanted peace with Israel, but he was willing to work for leverage to gain advantage.




> Why don't you think Palestinians live with the same daily terror as Israelis



Because there is zero - nada - zilch record of the Israelis EVER attacking the Palestinians or anybody else without provocation.  The closest to it was the Israeli airforce taking out Saddam Hussein's nuclear facility after Saddam had promised to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth.  Israel may have to do that with Iran's nuclear facility for the same reason.  Otherwise Israel has NEVER attacked anybody except in retaliation for attacks on Israelis in Israel or when those pledged to exterminate Israel were amassing attack forces on Israel's borders.

Palestinians know darn well that if they don't harrass Israel, they have absolutely nothing to fear from Israel in any way.  They choose to continue harrassment and then claim victimhood that they know will be believed by those who operate from kneejerk emotionalism and/or hatred of Israel and/or the USA.  Further their terrorists intentionally place their rocket launchers and hide their munitions among women and children to ensure that any retaliation from Israel will likely injure or kill women and children.  This gives the noble Palestinians more ammunition to use to gain that sympathy.


----------



## José (Jul 17, 2008)

Waiting for the token, empty, face-saving comment on the idea I proposed.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 17, 2008)

*Israel Police arrest settlers for assault on Palestinian farmers*


Police said after the attack they were also investigating whether the footage was staged by local Palestinians.



Israel Police arrest settlers for assault on Palestinian farmers - Haaretz - Israel News



yeaaa... nothing to fear from israelis indeed..



hey look, another round of evidence, Fox!


----------



## editec (Jul 17, 2008)

José;721690 said:
			
		

> my idea of an international protectorate in Palestine!!!
> 
> Editec considered my plan well-intentioned but doomed to fail due to human nature.
> 
> ...


 
Hey, Jose, at least you're thinking about finding solutions.

Most people here are content getting up on their high horses so they can tell other people that they're racists.

They don't want peace, they want strife.

And that is why I say your plan will not work incidently

Too damned many Zionists, and too damned many Arabists like things the way they are. Peacekeeping only works when enough people truly want peace.

It took ~ what? ~ about 80 years for the Irish and the Scots colonialists to finally realize that they weren't going to win peace in Northern Ireland and  they quashed their respective hotheads to knock it the hell off?

It could take Israelites and Palestinians that long to find their peace, too.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 17, 2008)

Amnesty International's Israel Report 2007 said:
			
		

> Describing the security fence as "the wall of death," the report states: "The 700-kilometer fence/wall that Israel is building through the West Bank, from north to south and through parts of Jerusalem, is causing massive long-term damage to Palestinian life and is undermining the ability of those living in dozens of villages and communities to realize a wide range of their human rights."
> 
> In the report, Amnesty lists seven "recommendations" for the Israeli government, which include calls to "end the regime of closures in its current form, as well as other forms of restrictions on freedom of movement of people and goods, that result in collective punishment... Stop the construction of the fence/wall inside the West Bank, including East Jerusalem..." and to "stop immediately the destruction of houses, land, and other properties without absolute military necessity as prescribed by international humanitarian law."



Amnesty International: Israel destroying hope of Palestinians - Israel News, Ynetnews

Interview included, a pretty good one, and it's from a Jewish site.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 17, 2008)

*t took ~ what? ~ about 80 years for the Irish and the Scots colonialists to finally realize that they weren't going to win peace in Northern Ireland and they quashed their respective hotheads to knock it the hell off?*



WHAT?!?!?!?!??!  and the UK didn't become a molten boil of rock slag therafter?!?!?!


----------



## José (Jul 17, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> And that is why I say your plan will not work incidently
> 
> *Too damned many Zionists, and too damned many Arabists like things the way they are. Peacekeeping only works when enough people truly want peace.*
> ...



So true, editec. Too many theocrats and racial supremacists on both sides.

But let me tell you why I believe the two state solution is the one that will never work and was in fact doomed from the start (1948):

1. The jewish people will never give up their right to live in Eastern Palestine,        *where 90% of the jewish history took place*, that will fall forever out of reach in a Palestinian state. 

*Eastern Palestine = West Bank = Biblical Israel.* 

Need I say more? Thats why the settlement expansion activity never stopped not even during the Oslo peace process.

2. The Palestinian people will never accept being barred from their ancestral land in Western Palestine, the land lost to Israel and that shaped so much of their history as a people.

*The peoples of Palestine will never accept a border in the middle of their historical homeland.*

But as you rightly pointed out, the biggest obstacle to the *MORALLY SUPERIOR* one state solution are the assholes from both sides who dont want to *SHARE* the land in a unitary state.

But Im an optimist. This is not an insurmountable obstacle. The same kind of assholes were ultimately defeated in America, South Africa and theres every reason to believe they will eventually meet the same fate in Palestine.

Either through the establishment of an international protectorate in Palestine or through Israel's gradual evolution from a jewish state to a state of citizens.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 17, 2008)

Shogun said:


> *Israel Police arrest settlers for assault on Palestinian farmers*
> 
> 
> Police said after the attack they were also investigating whether the footage was staged by local Palestinians.
> ...




Note the Israeli police arrested Israelis for it. Can the same be said for the Palestinian police?


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 18, 2008)

For someone who originally claimed to not comment on Israel-related topics, Charles takes quite a vociferous stand on all the issues.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 18, 2008)

Anguille said:


> What about Jewish converts? And descendants of converts? What about Arab Jews? What about multiracial Jews? In your opinion, do they have any claim to that land and on what basis?
> 
> Do the Celts have a greater historical claim to England than the Anglo-Saxons?



There were never, as a matter of fact, any people called 'Celts' anywhere in Britain until the late seventeenth Century, when Lhuyd borrowed this term to cover linguistic resemblances between the western peoples, and Oppenheimer - who seems to be about the best historical geneticist around - reckons the 'Anglo-Saxon' contribution to the population to be about five per cent.   Each of the Archipelago countries has a majority of people whose genetic heritage is the same as the modern Basques, as a matter of fact.   It all goes to show how dubious is any argument based on current fantasies about the past (for my money, the majority of the current Jewish population of occupied Palestine is probably Khazar in its distant origins, but I'm no geneticist, and who cares?).
One of the worst things about the zionists is the way that they have tried to implicate the vast mass of decent Jewish people in their bloody atrocities, and the worst of all is the way they lie and lie and lie about the possiblities of a settlement _given the most minimal degree of sincerity and decency on their side_.   Instead we have the standard mean-souled racist spite.   What is Jewish about that?


----------



## midcan5 (Jul 18, 2008)

Self referential, the plight of modern man and society.


----------



## editec (Jul 18, 2008)

Folks, I LOVE history. 

And history is a tool that can help us understand how we got where we are.

But sometimes history can be a roadblock to problem solving because we cannot forget it and some of us cannot forgive it..

It doesn't matter if ancient Isreal existed 

It doesn't matter that the Romans controlled Palestine

It doesn't matter that the Christian romans controlled Palestine

It doesn't matter that the various Arab or Turk Islamic empires controlled it either.

It doesn't matter that the British had no right to give Zionists the go ahead to move to Palestine.

It doesn't matter that Palestinians were driven out of their homes in the civil war that created Israel.

It doesn't matter that the fledgling state of Israel was attacked

All that matters NOW is the conditions on the ground NOW.

Can we find a single state or two state solution?

I cannot blame Israelis for rejecting the single state solution. 

They know that they'd be outnumbers outvoted and the character of the nation would change to something they could not stand.

I cannot blame the Palestinians for rejecting the laughable two state solution as currently designed, either.

The land they are ceeded is NOT a viable land economically, It would makes them forever beholden to other nations for water, and its economic stability, too.

FWIW the original returning Jewish settlers had NO PLANS to eject the Palestinians. In fact there was a time when they lived in peace. When the Jews who returned BOUGHT the land and worked it and hired Palestinains to work along side of them.

But the decision was made, when the Jews of Palestine saw that there would be enormous numbers of Jewish refugees, to make room for the Jews, and that really meant displacing the Arabs.

Hence the disaster of 1948, 

The Arab states overreaction to the existence of Isreal, and the susequent eviction or abandonment of and by the Palestinians leave us with the problem of millions of displaced Palestinians who are now unwelcome in their homeland.

Who do I blame?

I blame the British, the Zionists, the Palestinians and the Arab states that tried to drive the Jews into the sea, too.

I blame everybody involved and I sympathize with everybody involved EXCEPT the Brits and the Arab states which attacked the feldgling nation of Israel.

I blame the ethnocentists and I blame the hotheads and terrorists who won't back down and seek a viable compromise that works for EVERYONE.

It's a complex situation with penty of guilt and credit to go around..

But Isreal exists today, and it is not going away.

And the Palestinian people exist today, and they aren't going away, either.

It really is up to _those people_ to solve this problem.


----------



## jillian (Jul 18, 2008)

Which is why people need to stop using words like "nazi" and "apartheid" and talking about a one-state solution which is never going to happen.

Beyond that, the shape of a two-state soluation is certainly, as Israel's shown, negotiable.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 18, 2008)

jillian said:


> Which is why people need to stop using words like "nazi" and "apartheid" and talking about a one-state solution which is never going to happen.
> 
> Beyond that, the shape of a two-state soluation is certainly, as Israel's shown, negotiable.



As your late and unlamented leader doubtless said, 'All the Europeans need to do is accept absolutely the Third Reich's total requirements and their own status a lower-grade humans within it (while - we insist -executing the so-called 'Resistance' for us) and they will find us always ready to negotiate, particularly on their extermination.'

As you very well know, the zionist leadership, despite its murdering or locking up the actual Palestinian leadership and replacing them with quislings, won't even negotiate with _them_, but starts, always, gross provocations which, when they produce the required reaction, enable them to refuse to negotiate with 'terrorism'.

Words like 'Nazi' and 'apartheid' are used because they are exactly accurate.   Zionism is Hitler's creation, as well you know.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 18, 2008)

I hereby declare Editec the winner on this thread.


----------



## manifold (Jul 18, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I hereby declare Editec the winner on this thread.



I second the motion.


----------



## jillian (Jul 18, 2008)

Rhys said:


> As your late and unlamented leader doubtless said, 'All the Europeans need to do is accept absolutely the Third Reich's total requirements and their own status a lower-grade humans within it (while - we insist -executing the so-called 'Resistance' for us) and they will find us always ready to negotiate, particularly on their extermination.'
> 
> As you very well know, the zionist leadership, despite its murdering or locking up the actual Palestinian leadership and replacing them with quislings, won't even negotiate with _them_, but starts, always, gross provocations which, when they produce the required reaction, enable them to refuse to negotiate with 'terrorism'.
> 
> Words like 'Nazi' and 'apartheid' are used because they are exactly accurate.   Zionism is Hitler's creation, as well you know.



And you wonder why people like you get called anti-semites and why it's so apparent that your views are based in racial/ethnic hatred:



> anti-Semitism is considered to be hatred toward Jewsindividually and as a groupthat can be attributed to the Jewish religion and/or ethnicity. An important issue is the distinction between legitimate criticism of policies and practices of the State of Israel, and commentary that assumes an anti-Semitic character. *The demonization of Israel, or vilification of Israeli leaders, sometimes through comparisons with Nazi leaders, and through the use of Nazi symbols to caricature them, indicates an anti-Semitic bias rather than a valid criticism of policy concerning a controversial is*



Report on Global Anti-Semitism


----------



## Ravi (Jul 18, 2008)

jillian said:


> And you wonder why people like you get called anti-semites and why it's so apparent that your views are based in racial/ethnic hatred:
> 
> 
> 
> Report on Global Anti-Semitism



Yeah, but Jillian, that was probably written by a Jew. You do know the Department of State is controlled by Jews, don't you?


----------



## jillian (Jul 18, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yeah, but Jillian, that was probably written by a Jew. You do know the Department of State is controlled by Jews, don't you?



oh... right... I forgot...


----------



## Shogun (Jul 18, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Note the Israeli police arrested Israelis for it. Can the same be said for the Palestinian police?



And them proomptly LET THEM GO AND ASSUMED THAT PALS WERE CAUSING IT.


read the fucking article.


Is that how western nations work in your mind?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 18, 2008)

jillian said:


> Which is why people need to stop using words like "nazi" and "apartheid" and talking about a one-state solution which is never going to happen.
> 
> Beyond that, the shape of a two-state soluation is certainly, as Israel's shown, negotiable.



You keep thinking that as the world starts to ask why jews get to do what Aryans couldn't.


The two state solution SURE IS a rock solid certainty!


----------



## Rhys (Jul 18, 2008)

Well, Jillian, I'm afraid that the truth remains the truth however much you racists distort it and put out reports.   Those who are allowed to hear the facts about zionist terrorism are not convinced by any association between this neo-nazi statelet and the historic Jewish people:  by their fruits shall ye know them.   What I am 'anti' is colonialism, racism, ethnic cleansing, murder, especially of children, torture, and Goebbels-like lying.   Those are not _Jewish_ habits.   It was the zionists who hated the _actual_ Jews as they lived in the real world, and desperately tried to turn them into something entirely different.   You know this.  What an incredible victory for Hitler that those he most hated should try to imitate him in this way, becoming a Master Race whose lives are ten times as valuable as other people's!   It is extremely sad.   _No-one_ is safer for the existence of 'Israel'.


----------



## José (Jul 18, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Ravi*
> I hereby declare Editec the winner on this thread.





> Originally posted by *manifold*
> I second the motion.



And I hereby declare you both honorable members of the *WHAT THE HELL IS A PALESTINIAN REFUGEE??* crowd.


----------



## José (Jul 18, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> I cannot blame Israelis for rejecting the single state solution.
> 
> They know that they'd be outnumbers outvoted and the character of the nation would change to something they could not stand.



Sorry to break the news to you, editec, but the Israelis never accepted a two state solution in its 60 years of existence.

Ben Gurion always considered the creation of Israel as the first step in the reestablishment of the ancient state of Israel.



> Originally posted by *editec*
> I cannot blame the Palestinians for rejecting the laughable two state solution as currently designed, either.
> 
> The land they are ceeded is NOT a viable land economically, It would makes them forever beholden to other nations for water, and its economic stability, too.



Unfortunately, youre not able to connect the dots between your last 4 sentences.

The land they are ceded is not a viable territory *BECAUSE THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT DECIDED TO ANNEX AND COLONISE THE EASTERN HALF OF THE JEWISH HOMELAND!!!!!*

You show your total lack of knowledge on the palestinian people by stating that the palestinian people reject the two state solution because the land is not economically viable.

Arab countries can offer Palestinians half of the Middle East and their offer will be turned down in a heartbeat.

The palestinian people do not wish to live in Syria, Jordan or Saudi Arabia.

They want the right to live in their *historical homeland whose loss gave birth to their own national identiy*.


----------



## José (Jul 18, 2008)

Again, little kids of the US Message Board.

Pay attention to Uncle Joe or youre not gonna pass your exam:


----------



## manifold (Jul 18, 2008)

José;722442 said:
			
		

> Again, little kids of the US Message Board.
> 
> Pay attention to Uncle Joe or youre not gonna pass your exam:



There's gonna be an exam?

Fuck!


----------



## José (Jul 18, 2008)

*THE JEWISH PEOPLE WILL NEVER ACCEPT A BORDER IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR HOMELAND AS THE SETTLEMENT ACTIVITY PROVES.*

*THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE WILL NEVER ACCEPT A BORDER IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR HOMELAND AS THE ENORMOUS SUFFERING THEY HAVE BEEN WILLING TO ENDURE DURING THE LAST 60 YEARS PROVES.*

Uncle joe is not talking about history, about ancient israel, past events that dont matter anymore, etc, etc, etc...

*UNCLE JOE IS TALKING ABOUT THE JEWISH NATIONAL IDENTITY AND THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY.*

Something that is very much alive today in the hearts of jews and palestinians alike.

*PEACE PLANS BASED ON PARTITION IGNORE THE JEWISH AND THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL IDENTIY AND THEREFORE ARE DESTINED TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY EVEN BEFORE BEING CONCEIVED AS THE LAST 60 YEARS HAVE SHOWN US.*

The only thing that comes from peace plans that ignore the jewish and the palestinian national identity is hundreds of thousands of dead arabs, jews, not to mention a few thousand american workers turned into ground meat by enraged arabs.

The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and over expecting different results.

Peace plans based on the partition of palestine fit the definition of insanity perfectly.


----------



## editec (Jul 18, 2008)

jillian said:


> Which is why people need to stop using words like "nazi" and "apartheid" and talking about a one-state solution which is never going to happen.
> 
> Beyond that, the shape of a two-state soluation is certainly, as Israel's shown, negotiable.


 
I understand.

And the anti-Semite charge hurled willy-nilly every time you encounter arguments you'd rather ignore, or history you'd like to forget, likewise counter-productive.


----------



## editec (Jul 18, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I hereby declare Editec the winner on this thread.


 
Thanks.

Mention my name to the State Department, would you?

I could use a job.


----------



## jillian (Jul 18, 2008)

editec said:


> I understand.
> 
> And the anti-Semite charge hurled willy-nilly every time you encounter arguments you'd rather ignore, or history you'd like to forget, likewise counter-productive.



Perhaps I've been dealing with this issue longer than you. It's not about disagreeing with me. My best friend on this board and I have disagreed on this issue for 5 years. The difference is, he doesn't liken zionism to racism or nazism or apartheid.  Nor does he promote the idea of jews living subjugated to Arabs in a one-state solution.

That's the difference between someone who's concerned about the issue and someone who's hiding their anti-semitism behind some anti-Israel agenda.

So it depends on which side of that line you fall.


----------



## editec (Jul 18, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yeah, but Jillian, that was probably written by a Jew. You do know the Department of State is controlled by Jews, don't you?


 
Nonsense.

It's controled by Ivy League graduates or the scions of the very well connected.  It is the place where especially bright people, often the scions of equally bright people, often end up if they elect government service.

They're right more than they're wrong, but our POTUSs have often ignored their sage advice.



> An important issue is the distinction between legitimate criticism of policies and practices of the State of Israel, and commentary that assumes an anti-Semitic character.


 
Right on.

Some of us on this board seem to think that we can hide behind the smokescreen of legitimate complaints and resonable debates about Isreal/Palestinian issue to spew the Jew hating venon poisoning  our hearts. 

I ain't buying into  that passive-aggressive bullshit any more than Jillian is, boys.

No more than I'm going to accept that every complaint, however justified by facts, or any review of history of the region that the Isreali partisans object to makes one an anti-Semite.

Many of us simply try to write around this idiotic crap because the issue is too important to leave it to you partisans.


----------



## jillian (Jul 18, 2008)

editec said:


> Nonsense.
> 
> It's controled by Ivy League graduates or the scions of the very well connected.  It is the place where especially bright people, often the scions of equally bright people, often end up if they elect government service.
> 
> ...



I suspect that if you hadn't pigeon-holed me as accepting every single thing Israel ever did, we might have found a place of agreement on this issue or at least civil discussion. I had a lot to say, particularly when Sharon was in charge (although he moderated his views at the end). But with the current leadership, the same arguments don't apply. They certainly didn't apply when Rabin was in charge.

I just have issue with people who think they can take positions against Israel that end up with dead or subjugated Jews. It's kind of like when a couple is divorced... they shouldn't live together and the house should be partitioned.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 18, 2008)

Hey Editic!

I posted some quotes for you in another thread where you said that segregation is ONLY natural...  Care to comment on your thurmon-esqu approach?  I bet insinuating antisemtism will make your position less in common with ole Stroms...


----------



## editec (Jul 18, 2008)

jillian said:


> Perhaps I've been dealing with this issue longer than you.


 
I kinda fucking doubt that, Jill. 



> It's not about disagreeing with me.


 
No? Fooled me, then. 



> My best friend on this board and I have disagreed on this issue for 5 years. The difference is, he doesn't liken zionism to racism or nazism or apartheid.


 
Zionism is a very large bag. Some Zionists are racists, Jill. Pretending that isn't true simply undermines your credibility.

Now comparing Zionists to NAZIs is totally over the top, I agree with that.. as do many people here who are not sympathetic to (esp) AMERICAN Zionists.

But as to the aparthied charge? 

Well that's more complex, isn't it? Because Isreal DOES have some Palestinians who have full rights, and then too it does have internally displaced Arabs with few rights; plus Arabs living in shitholes where having a life is fucking impossiblel and it Isreal ALSO continues to not recognize the deeds of Isreali citizens of Arab descent who had clear titles (recognized by the British mandate) to land that was taken by force of arms from ARAB CIVILIANS.

So there are elements of the current system which are aparthied-like, and the analogy does have some validity, too.



> Nor does he promote the idea of jews living subjugated to Arabs in a one-state solution.


 
Understood. But you apparently have no problem (at least, I have yet to note your objections if you have them) to Arabs who are subjected to Israel's less than tender mercies under IDF military dictatorship and occupation, or your objections to Isreali settlements in PA land seem remarkably absent from these discussions, too.



> That's the difference between someone who's concerned about the issue and someone who's hiding their anti-semitism behind some anti-Israel agenda.


 
No shit.

Hopefully, you'll read what people are actually writing instead of assuming that because somebody wrote something you object to you'll posit that they must therefore also believe _bla bla bla_ like you have done to me, and I note to others on many occassions, too.



> So it depends on which side of that line you fall.


 
No, it does _not._

Truth is truth even if we don't want it to be. 

Attacking as anti-Semite or racist, every person who brings irrefuteable facts to the discussion that you'd rather not hear IS not excused (by honest players, at least) just because you support Israel's right to exist.

Truth telling is not racism, even if you think charging people as such will shut them up.

If someone is a racist?

We'll know it without you having to point it out to us.

Stick to the issue and let these crypto-nazi scum hang themselves in the court of public opinion.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 18, 2008)

Rhys said:


> There were never, as a matter of fact, any people called 'Celts' anywhere in Britain until the late seventeenth Century, when Lhuyd borrowed this term to cover linguistic resemblances between the western peoples, and Oppenheimer - who seems to be about the best historical geneticist around - reckons the 'Anglo-Saxon' contribution to the population to be about five per cent.   Each of the Archipelago countries has a majority of people whose genetic heritage is the same as the modern Basques, as a matter of fact.   It all goes to show how dubious is any argument based on current fantasies about the past (for my money, the majority of the current Jewish population of occupied Palestine is probably Khazar in its distant origins, but I'm no geneticist, and who cares?).
> One of the worst things about the zionists is the way that they have tried to implicate the vast mass of decent Jewish people in their bloody atrocities, and the worst of all is the way they lie and lie and lie about the possiblities of a settlement _given the most minimal degree of sincerity and decency on their side_.   Instead we have the standard mean-souled racist spite.   What is Jewish about that?



The people we now refer to as Celts, as a people did in fact exist since at least the Iron Age in Europe (approx1200-500 BC).  Your statement is technically correct in that the term "celt" is attributed to Lhuyd's writings in 1707. However, your statement also implies that the race of people now labelled Celts did not exist.

And just to take a short jab, you anti-Israel/Arab apologist folk need to get a clue.  I've never seen so much intelligence wrapped around an argument that when you clear away all the damned chaff amounts to 100% pure, Grade A bullshit.


----------



## jillian (Jul 18, 2008)

Editec:

Do you doubt that... I figure you're wrong, but it makes no matter.

Where did I say no zionists are racists? I said zionism is NOT racism.... and it isn't. I figure you're smart enough to tell the difference, as can I.

And you can keep insulting me or not... 

You talk about the displaced Arabs... my people were displaced from Belarus. My great grandmother thought the pogroms sucked. Happens... here they chose to leave because they followed the advice of their nazi grand mufti of jerusalem. silly, perhaps, but that's what happened. What also happened is they attacked the Israeli's and lost.  People who lose in battle get screwed sometimes. But even there, I've never said they shoulldn't have a country. It just can't be in Israel. Don't you think that's fair?

There's a reason Jordan and Egypt didn't let them in... 

so you can keep snotting off to me and keep insulting me, but like I said, I know the realistic difference between a one and two state solution and the people who support one over the other.

And the truth of THAT is truth whether YOU like it or not and want to shut up anyone who sees that.

Cheers.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 18, 2008)

editec said:


> Folks, I LOVE history.
> 
> And history is a tool that can help us understand how we got where we are.
> 
> ...



Excellent post.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 18, 2008)

editec said:


> Nonsense.
> 
> It's controled by Ivy League graduates or the scions of the very well connected.  It is the place where especially bright people, often the scions of equally bright people, often end up if they elect government service.
> 
> ...



Editec, I'm sorry you couldn't see the sarcasm dripping off of that post.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 18, 2008)

> Originally Posted by jillian
> Perhaps I've been dealing with this issue longer than you.





editec said:


> I kinda fucking doubt that, Jill.


----------



## jillian (Jul 18, 2008)

GunnyL said:


>



yeah... I know. lol...


----------



## Rhys (Jul 18, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> The people we now refer to as Celts, as a people did in fact exist since at least the Iron Age in Europe (approx1200-500 BC).  Your statement is technically correct in that the term "celt" is attributed to Lhuyd's writings in 1707. However, your statement also implies that the race of people now labelled Celts did not exist.
> 
> And just to take a short jab, you anti-Israel/Arab apologist folk need to get a clue.  I've never seen so much intelligence wrapped around an argument that when you clear away all the damned chaff amounts to 100% pure, Grade A bullshit.



There is no 'race' of people called Celts, or any other 'race' but the human, so that little bit is pointless.   There were some people called Celts in the south of France in Roman times, I believe.   They did not visit Britain.   The people in Britain were British, as they had been since the ice withdrew.

I'm afraid my education doesn't equip me to translate your second paragraph into English.   It sounds unpleasant, however.


----------



## roomy (Jul 18, 2008)

Rhys said:


> There is no 'race' of people called Celts, or any other 'race' but the human, so that little bit is pointless.   There were some people called Celts in the south of France in Roman times, I believe.   They did not visit Britain.   The people in Britain were British, as they had been since the ice withdrew.
> 
> I'm afraid my education doesn't equip me to translate your second paragraph into English.   It sounds unpleasant, however.


The Celts

Now will you shut the fuck up you ignorant gobshite?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 18, 2008)

roomy said:


> The Celts
> 
> Now will you shut the fuck up you ignorant gobshite?



I guess the question is, are the Celts a race or an ethnic group with in a race. When checking a box on an application about your race, have you ever seen "Celt" as one of the options? or do the Celts simply check caucasian?


----------



## Gunny (Jul 18, 2008)

Rhys said:


> There is no 'race' of people called Celts, or any other 'race' but the human, so that little bit is pointless.   There were some people called Celts in the south of France in Roman times, I believe.   They did not visit Britain.   The people in Britain were British, as they had been since the ice withdrew.
> 
> I'm afraid my education doesn't equip me to translate your second paragraph into English.   It sounds unpleasant, however.



Another wannabe-intellectual genius, huh?  Self-proclaimed, no doubt.

Your education seems to be rather lacking.

The scientific classification _homo sapien _refers to genus and species, respectively.  In simple terms for you, Man is a species of animal, not a race.   Race is a further subdivision of humans based on common genetics/traits unique to and used to identify certain groups of people.

I take it your education also does not equip you to even discuss Celts, based on your ignorant statement.  Educating yourself is but a few clicks away:

Celtic Europe

Celtic History

Ancient celtic history

A little help with my last statement since complex sentences appear a bit much for you ...

People who attempt to villify Isael and/or Jews for having the audacity to demand the right to exist and back it up with force are either ignorant or stupid.  Feel free to choose one.

Before you start the wailing and gnashing of teeth why don't you just ask yourself why there had to be a Jewish state to begin with?    

Israel wouldn't even exist if Europe, to include the UK and the US weren't in such a frenzy to find a place far, far away where they could pigeonhole those "dirty chews".   A great idea for intolerant bigots in the opening years of the 20th century when the world was still a vast place.

I'm only surprised by the calm and decency that most Jews display in the face of hatred based solely on their religion/race.  Was I one, I'd be hatin' you haters right back.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 18, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> Another wannabe-intellectual genius, huh?  Self-proclaimed, no doubt.
> 
> Your education seems to be rather lacking.
> 
> ...




What I said was true. When was the last time you saw, Celts, on an application as one of the choices for a race?


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 18, 2008)

Shhhh...don't mention it and maybe we won't be forced to add it to our self-sufficiency and seniors and people with disabilities applications. People already have to identify themselves by race AND ethnicity.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 18, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> Israel wouldn't even exist if Europe, to include the UK and the US weren't in such a frenzy to find a place far, far away where they could pigeonhole those "dirty chews". .



The Zionists WANTED Palestine. They weren't banished there.


----------



## Yurt (Jul 18, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> The Zionists WANTED Palestine. They weren't banished there.



i understand that jews started buying the land as far back as 1870's.  the land was considered worthless by arabs/muslims....and has been considered worthless since muhammad was rejected by the jews in jerusalem (about 1400 years ago) and then muhammad had a "divine" thought to now have prayer towards mecca.  allah, all knowing....

muslims hate jews


----------



## editec (Jul 18, 2008)

Yurt said:


> i understand that jews started buying the land as far back as 1870's.


 
About 2% of the population of Jerusalem was Jewish before the Zionist movement was ever heard of.

They'd probably been there since the time of Jesus, too.



> the land was considered worthless by arabs/muslims


 
Poppycock. You seem to be trying to support a myth based on the _we found a desert and made it a garden myth_ by making stuff up that sounds plausible _to you based on that myth._

The early Zionists pioneers were not fools. They bought aridable land when they could. 

Read this account 





> Pogroms flared up once again in Russia in the first years of the 20th century. In 1903 at Kishinev peasant mobs were incited against Jews after a blood libel. Riots again took place in the wake of Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese War and the 1905 Revolution. The occurrence of new pogroms inspired yet another wave of Russian Jews to emigrate. As in the 1880s, most emigrants went to the United States, but a minority went to Palestine. It was this generation that would include founders of the kibbutzim.
> Like the members of the First Aliya who came before them, most members of the Second Aliya wanted to be farmers in the Trans-Jordan. Those who would go on to found the kibbutzim first went to a village of the Biluim, Rishon LeZion, to find work there. The founders of the kibbutz were morally appalled by what they saw in the Jewish settlers there "with their Jewish overseers, Arab peasant laborers, and Bedouin guards." They saw the new villages and were reminded of the places they had left in Eastern Europe. Instead of the beginning of a pure Jewish commonwealth, they felt that what they saw recreated the Jewish socioeconomic structure of the Pale of Settlement, where Jews functioned in clean jobs, while other groups did the dirty work.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Gavron19_12-0>[13]</SUP>
> Yossef Baratz, who went on to found the first kibbutz, wrote of his time working at Zikhron Yaakov:
> 
> ...


 


> ....and has been considered worthless since muhammad was rejected by the jews in jerusalem (about 1400 years ago) and then muhammad had a "divine" thought to now have prayer towards mecca. allah, all knowing....
> 
> muslims hate jews


 
Well...somebody hates somebody, I think.

The  minority of very religious Jews managed to live in relative peace with the Moslems in Jerusalem_ for over a thousand years._

In fact the only time I know that the Jews of Jersalem were molested by religious zealots was when July 15, 1099.

That's when the Crusaders took it over and slaughtered every single Jew and/or Moslem they could get their Christian hands on.

Does that mean Christians hate Jews more than Moselms do, or does it mean that you can't generalize about something so vast as the history of Islam, Christians and the Jews?


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 18, 2008)

And at that time, the Muslims were right to hate us.

But they didn't. Their religion has changed RADICALLY since then.

It's a different world now, and we aren't doing that to them. They're attempting to do it to us. But it's okay...because it's THEM instead of US committing atrocities.


----------



## editec (Jul 18, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> And at that time, the Muslims were right to hate us.
> 
> But they didn't. Their religion has changed RADICALLY since then.
> 
> It's a different world now, and we aren't doing that to them. They're attempting to do it to us. But it's okay...because it's THEM instead of US committing atrocities.


 
Yes, whenever I want the scivy on the mindset of about a billion people, you'll be the man I come to for it.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 18, 2008)

I'm not a man. The fact that you've managed to miss that shows that your radar is a little skewed to begin with.


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> What I said was true. When was the last time you saw, Celts, on an application as one of the choices for a race?




Right next to Vikings and just before Jutes, never forget the Jutes 

Or could it be that they didn't bother with passports in those days?


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 19, 2008)

roomy said:


> Right next to Vikings and just before Jutes, never forget the Jutes
> 
> Or could it be that they didn't bother with passports in those days?



Thankfully someone remembered the Jutes!   

No passports, I think the modern descendants of the Jutes hail from Millwall FC supporters club....


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 19, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Thankfully someone remembered the Jutes!
> 
> No passports, I think the modern descendants of the Jutes hail from Millwall FC supporters club....



Well at least a couple guys, or gals, on this board have a sense of humor and realize not everything is serious


----------



## Rhys (Jul 19, 2008)

roomy said:


> The Celts
> 
> Now will you shut the fuck up you ignorant gobshite?



Ah, that old-fashioned American charm!   What a shame we have lost those courtly manners of yours!

That's antique stuff you point me to.   Read Stephen Oppenheimer's 'The Origins of the British' to catch up with modern thinking.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Ah, that old-fashioned American charm!   What a shame we have lost those courtly manners of yours!
> 
> That's antique stuff you point me to.   Read Stephen Oppenheimer's 'The Origins of the British' to catch up with modern thinking.



Purely belter!  roomy's a Geordie


----------



## Rhys (Jul 19, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> The scientific classification _homo sapien _refers to genus and species, respectively.  In simple terms for you, Man is a species of animal, not a race.   Race is a further subdivision of humans based on common genetics/traits unique to and used to identify certain groups of people.
> 
> I take it your education also does not equip you to even discuss Celts...
> 
> ...



Your alleged 'races' have more genetic differences within them than there are between the alleged 'averages' of those alleged races.   In fact there are no such things, outside the fantasies of racists.   Grow up!

Yes, my education does allow me to discuss 'Celts' without reading up old racist fantasies about these tall/short, fair/dark red-headed people.   The only basis for the whole tottery narrative comes from a Roman confusion about where the source of the Danube lay.   As I suggested to another grumpy person, you might try reading Stephen Oppenheimer's 'The Origins of the British'.   'Celtic' is, as I think we really agree, is a linguistic term, and should be left as that.   Linguistically I am sort-of-Celtic;  politically I am a Cymro/British citizen (in official fantasy subject to a Queen of German background);  genetically I am, like most British people, closest to the Basques.   These various categories should be kept apart and examined individually.   Are the Jamaicans German because they speak a Germanic language?  Light-skinned and fair and that?

I know perfectly well why there is a Zionist state, thank you:  it is because a small minority of the persons-regarded-by-others-as-Jews (whether religious or not) despaired of living as civilized people in a Europe growing less civilized and more hostile daily.   They decided to imitate their barbarous neighbours by setting up their own racist state, stealing someone else's country to do it in, and that despairing course is, in their circumstances _then_, understandable.   But for Hitler and the gross failure of the US and the UK to take on the survivors or his murderous career, these fanatics would have remained more obviously the handful of nutty weirdoes they always were, but in the circumstances 'Israel' was at least somewhere to go.   It is, of course, as you imply, a big ghetto.   You are quite correct in blaming other Europeans for its creation, but it manifestly does not fulfil its purpose:  no-one, as I've argued before, is the better or the safer for its existence, and it may yet succeed in reviving the anti-Jewish feeling the Belsen pictures killed stone dead.   The sooner it is replaced by a non-racist state with international guarantees, the safer everyone will be.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 19, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Purely belter!  roomy's a Geordie



Can't be, mun!   I was only saying to someone the other day that I'd never met a bad un.   Or perhaps he's the only one whose words I can understand?   This world is full of mysteries.


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Can't be, mun!   I was only saying to someone the other day that I'd never met a bad un.   Or perhaps he's the only one whose words I can understand?   This world is full of mysteries.




I certainly am you ignorant gobshite, now belt up you ponce


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 19, 2008)

This place is full of mysteries Rhys - it's what makes it interesting.

Now I feel like I'm in a episode of "Auf Wiedersehen, Pet"* 

*that's a good thing, it was a brilliant programme.

Now I'm going to be stoned for thread drift


----------



## Ravi (Jul 19, 2008)

I have a question. If Celts aren't considered a "race" and can't be separated out from the Brits, how can Jews be considered a separate race than the Arabs? All these comments about Israel being a racist state make no sense.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 19, 2008)

Dunno Ravi.  But a question popped into my mind.  When did people become "Arabs"?  I ask because I don't have a clue.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 19, 2008)

I don't either since I wasn't around back in the 9th century.

the arabs in antiquity: Their ... - Google Book Search


----------



## editec (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Your alleged 'races' have more genetic differences within them than there are between the alleged 'averages' of those alleged races. In fact there are no such things, outside the fantasies of racists. Grow up!


 






> Yes, my education does allow me to discuss 'Celts' without reading up old racist fantasies about these tall/short, fair/dark red-headed people. The only basis for the whole *tottery* narrative comes from a Roman confusion about where the source of the Danube lay.


 
_I seldom find I have to look a word up, but *tottery?*_



> As I suggested to another grumpy person, you might try reading Stephen Oppenheimer's 'The Origins of the British'. 'Celtic' is, as I think we really agree, is a linguistic term, and should be left as that. Linguistically I am sort-of-Celtic; politically I am a Cymro/British citizen (in official fantasy subject to a Queen of German background); genetically I am, like most British people, closest to the Basques. These various categories should be kept apart and examined individually. Are the Jamaicans German because they speak a Germanic language? Light-skinned and fair and that?


 
It does get confusing, doesn't it? 

What is _a race_? What is _a culture? _What are "_a people_"?

It all seems so obvious on its face, but do a little historic/liguistic/athropological investigation, and the those well grounded concepts can be knocked over with a feather.



> I know perfectly well why there is a Zionist state, thank you: it is because a small minority of the persons-regarded-by-others-as-Jews (whether religious or not) despaired of living as civilized people in a Europe growing less civilized and more hostile daily.


 
I'm feeling increasing that way about America, to be frank. (But not Frankish! _Nobody_ likes those froggish Celts)



> They decided to imitate their barbarous neighbours by setting up their own racist state, stealing someone else's country to do it in, and that despairing course is, in their circumstances _then_, understandable.


 
The poor Jews. We bitch at them when they're too civilized. And then, when they start acting like us, (you know... acting like racist and ethnocentric bullies) we bitch about them acting like NAZIs.




> But for Hitler and the gross failure of the US and the UK to take on the survivors or his murderous career, these fanatics would have remained more obviously* the handful of nutty weirdoes* they always were,


 
You mean socialist utopians? The early Kibbutzim remind me of the 1970's _back-to-earther_ hippies. _Oy, groovy!_



> but in the circumstances 'Israel' was at least somewhere to go.


 
Of course those Zionists considered going elsewhere. South America, for example and Africa, too. But they realized that the only place that really had any real estate appeal to the people who'd been toasting _" Next year in Jerusalem" _for the last thousands years, would be Palestine. 



> It is, of course, as you imply, a big ghetto. You are quite correct in blaming other Europeans for its creation, but it manifestly does not fulfil its purpose: no-one, as I've argued before, is the better or the safer for its existence, and *it may yet succeed in reviving the anti-Jewish feeling the Belsen pictures killed stone dead.*


 
_May?_ I'd have to say it has revived that feeling in many, wouldn't you? If nothing else, the mistakes that Israel has made as it regards their treatment of the Palestinians, gives people already prone to Jew hating an excuse to spew their hateful nonsense behind the cover of their crocodile tears for people they'd probably hate equally, given half a chance...the Palestinians.



> The sooner it is replaced by a non-racist state with international guarantees, the safer everyone will be.


 
From your pen to God's ear.

I'm not really sure that even that would work though.

Not even if every Isreali bought into it.

I suspect that the Arab world has had its fill of international guarantees, given that what that phrase generally means is that the masters of the Western Universe guarantee that they (the Arabs) get screwed.

Trust lost is hard to find.


----------



## editec (Jul 19, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> I'm not a man. The fact that you've managed to miss that shows that your radar is a little skewed to begin with.


 
Your gender identity is far more important to you than it is to me, no doubt.

But I do apologise for any pain I caused you by thinking (or actually not thinking) about it.


----------



## editec (Jul 19, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I have a question. If Celts aren't considered a "race" and can't be separated out from the Brits, how can Jews be considered a separate race than the Arabs? All these comments about Israel being a racist state make no sense.


 
_BINGO!_ 

If I were forced to find a label for it, I'd say it was an enthocentric state, or perhaps better still, a state which has obvious cultural biases which truly piss some people off.

Israel is a colonialist state under siege by the native tribes who are not yet willing to accept that it exists, and is probably going to continue existing for a long, long time.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 19, 2008)

Should the native tribes be told about reality?  Compromise?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 19, 2008)

roomy said:


> I certainly am you ignorant gobshite, now belt up you ponce



That is very disillusioning.   Are you sure you aren't a toad or some other lower creature as well as an oafish, foulmouthed turd?   I've always found Geordies to be decent people, but I suppose there has to be an exception to every rule.   Ever thought about crawling into a sewer and dying?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 19, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I have a question. If Celts aren't considered a "race" and can't be separated out from the Brits, how can Jews be considered a separate race than the Arabs? All these comments about Israel being a racist state make no sense.



There ARE no 'races' - only racists believe in them.   There are 'imagined communities' people believe themselves to belong to, that's all.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> There ARE no 'races' - only racists believe in them.   There are 'imagined communities' people believe themselves to belong to, that's all.



Then you hopefully agree that your previous statement is wrong:



> The sooner it is replaced by a *non-racist* state with international guarantees, the safer everyone will be.


Otherwise, you are implying that Israelis are racist and IMO, that attitude from you coupled with your belief on "races" is racist in of itself.


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Then you hopefully agree that your previous statement is wrong:
> 
> Otherwise, you are implying that Israelis are racist and IMO, that attitude from you coupled with your belief on "races" is racist in of itself.



He's an idiot, Derbyshire is the idiot county of England, everybody knows that. and he is probably Welsh going by his name so that makes him a sheepshagging retard from Derbyshire.


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> There ARE no 'races' - only racists believe in them.   There are 'imagined communities' people believe themselves to belong to, that's all.



How come your rep is in the red? nobody like you?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 19, 2008)

editec said:


> The poor Jews. We bitch at them when they're too civilized. And then, when they start acting like us, (you know... acting like racist and ethnocentric bullies) we bitch about them acting like NAZIs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Beautiful posting, editec.   Do take care, or we shall be having a civilized discussion around here!

I think that the key to the problem will come, as in the Six Counties, when the most extreme elements on either side can get to talk seriously _to one another_.   On the model of Ireland I dread, otherwise, the hundreds of years of bloody pay-back that will be required for what's been done.   Nothing is more frightening than good boys and girs who _believe_ (and exaggerate) their parents version of the past - and I've spend a good deal of time talking to Irish-Americans and, indeed, the odd IRA volunteer, discovering that.   In these circumstances it is a great mistake to know some history - it tends to spoil the party entirely.  

I strive for the Old Testament Prophet note mostly, hoping it may remind people of where they're coming from.   It'll get me lynched in the finish, I'm afraid.   But, me,  I don't mind being _buried_ in France.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 19, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Then you hopefully agree that your previous statement is wrong:
> 
> Otherwise, you are implying that Israelis are racist and IMO, that attitude from you coupled with your belief on "races" is racist in of itself.



You are in a muddle, Ravi.   Only racists believe in 'race', and the zionists clearly do, so they are racist.  I don't, so I'm not.


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Beautiful posting, editec.   Do take care, or we shall be having a civilized discussion around here!
> 
> I think that the key to the problem will come, as in the Six Counties, when the most extreme elements on either side can get to talk seriously _to one another_.   On the model of Ireland I dread, otherwise, the hundreds of years of bloody pay-back that will be required for what's been done.   Nothing is more frightening than good boys and girs who _believe_ (and exaggerate) their parents version of the past - and I've spend a good deal of time talking to Irish-Americans and, indeed, the odd IRA volunteer, discovering that.   In these circumstances it is a great mistake to know some history - it tends to spoil the party entirely.
> 
> I strive for the Old Testament Prophet note mostly, hoping it may remind people of where they're coming from.   It'll get me lynched in the finish, I'm afraid.   But, me,  I don't mind being _buried_ in France.




You odious little man, you probably burned a few holiday chalets down as well.Fucking numpty.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 19, 2008)

roomy said:


> He's an idiot, Derbyshire is the idiot county of England, everybody knows that. and he is probably Welsh going by his name so that makes him a sheepshagging retard from Derbyshire.



You can't beat intelligent discussion, can you?


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> You can't beat intelligent discussion, can you?




You started it when I showed you up for the idiot that you are.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> You are in a muddle, Ravi.   Only racists believe in 'race', and the zionists clearly do, so they are racist.  I don't, so I'm not.



Uh huh. 

You might just as well 'fess up. You aren't fooling anyone.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 19, 2008)

I'm no anthropologist but I think I remember reading a big blue about what "race" is in a textbook a few years ago.  Confused the hell out of me.


----------



## José (Jul 19, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Diuretic*
> Should the native tribes be told about reality?



And what reality would be that, Diuretic?

The same &#8220;reality&#8221; of racism and subjugation the American and Australian colonists told the natives of the land a couple of centuries ago?

The reality of ethnic supremacism?


----------



## José (Jul 19, 2008)

What must a native do to be considered fully human in your book, Diuretic?

Does he have to know the Outback and play the didgeridoo to deserve to be treated fairly in a democratic state with equal rights for all?

Does he have to know how to chase wild animals with dingoes and throw boomerangs at canguroos and wallabies to have the right to move freely in their homeland?

I&#8217;m asking you these questions because you recently said you agree with the official apology issued by the Australian government to the native people of Australia.

Democracy, official apologies, reparations and compensations for the natives of America, South Africa and Australia and jewish racism for the natives of Palestine, Diuretic?


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 19, 2008)

José;723396 said:
			
		

> And what reality would be that, Diuretic?
> 
> The same &#8220;reality&#8221; of racism and subjugation the American and Australian colonists told the natives of the land a couple of centuries ago?
> 
> The reality of ethnic supremacism?



Editec posted:



> Israel is a colonialist state under siege by the native tribes who are not yet willing to accept that it exists, and is probably going to continue existing for a long, long time.



My post was in that context.  I think it's also in keeping with the topic of the thread.  I'm happy to discuss the issues you've indicated in another thread.


----------



## Diuretic (Jul 19, 2008)

José;723397 said:
			
		

> What must a native do to be considered fully human in your book, Diuretic?
> 
> Does he have to know the Outback and play the didgeridoo to deserve to be treated fairly in a democratic state with equal rights for all?
> 
> ...



As I said, more than happy to discuss those issues in another thread.


----------



## Reality (Jul 19, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Well thank you, especially after you gave me negative rep claiming it dishonest when I objected to being criticized for saying the exact same thing.
> 
> Maybe I misinterpreted when I read. If it was odious I apologize.
> 
> ...


----------



## José (Jul 19, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> Palestinians know darn well that if they don't harrass Israel, they have absolutely nothing to fear from Israel in any way. They choose to continue harrassment and then claim victimhood that they know will be believed by those who operate from kneejerk emotionalism and/or hatred of Israel and/or the USA. Further their terrorists intentionally place their rocket launchers and hide their munitions among women and children to ensure that any retaliation from Israel will likely injure or kill women and children. This gives the noble Palestinians more ammunition to use to gain that sympathy.





> Originally posted by *Reality*
> All you are doing is presenting the Israeli perspective.



All he's doing is presenting the Israeli perspective, Reality?

The guy is unashamedly portraying a racial dictatorship as the "victim" of the native people of Palestine it keeps herded in arab corrals for 60 years and counting.

Talk about moral depravity.


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

José;723397 said:
			
		

> What must a native do to be considered fully human in your book, Diuretic?
> 
> Does he have to know the Outback and play the didgeridoo to deserve to be treated fairly in a democratic state with equal rights for all?
> 
> ...



I don't think you can blame Diuretic for all that but go ahead anyway. I am betting that is the first time you've ever had to write the words dingoes and canguroos?


----------



## Reality (Jul 19, 2008)

roomy said:


> You odious little man, you probably burned a few holiday chalets down as well.Fucking numpty.



I thought this board had standards for posting?


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

Reality said:


> I thought this board had standards for posting?


Obviously not, you are allowed to post you thick racist bastard.


----------



## Reality (Jul 19, 2008)

roomy said:


> Obviously not, you are allowed to post you thick racist bastard.



I've got more than name calling to contribute.


----------



## roomy (Jul 19, 2008)

Reality said:


> I've got more than name calling to contribute.




Then you need to start................................................NOW.


















fucking racist idiot.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 19, 2008)

José;723436 said:
			
		

> All he's doing is presenting the Israeli perspective, Reality?
> 
> The guy is unashamedly portraying a racial dictatorship as the "victim" of the native people of Palestine it keeps herded in arab corrals for 60 years and counting.
> 
> Talk about moral depravity.




Moral depravity?  Really?  Perhaps you would like to point out the many instances in which Israel has attacked Palestinians without provocation?  Perhaps you can show the Israeli policy that denies Palestine or Palestinians the right to exist or condemns them as deserving of being forced off the face of the Earth.  Perhaps you can show where Palestinians welcome and accommodate Israeli Jews as having full human rights and privileges of citizenship that are enjoyed by the almost 2 million Palestinian people who are citizens of Israel?

Perhaps you can show where Israelis have gone into crowded markets or mosques or onto busses filled with mothers and school children and blown them up?  Perhaps you can show where Israelis have fired rockets or morters indiscriminately into Palestinian neighborhoods hoping to kill or maim somebody--anybody--doesn't matter how young or old or how innocent?  Perhaps you can show where Israelis have sneaked into Palestinian residential areas, took random civilians accused of nothing, and slit their throats or tortured them to death?

You will have to go back well before the establishment of the new Israel to find evidence of Jewish terrorists operating from Israel.

And then, when you are unable to come up with credible instances of any of that directed toward Palestinians which can be shown to be Israeli policy, committed at Iraeli orders, or condoned by the Israeli people, I suggest you read this short essay published this week:
RealClearPolitics - Articles - A Child Killer's Homecoming

Is there reason to criticize some of the policies Israel implemented to defend themselves or to effectively retaliate against terrorist attacks on Israel?  Yes there is.  But whether or not is wasn't the best choice or whether it was overreaction or whatever, you will not find ANY instances where Israelis have intentionally targeted women and children or any innocents, nor any instances where they use those kinds of people as shields and targets as the Palestinian terrorists do.

And once you have looked at the history and evaluated each circumstance, then perhaps you will have some understanding of what moral depravity is all about.  I rather doubt you'll get it--perhaps you even condone what Palestinian terrorists do.  I have no idea.  But fortunately there are some people who still think rationally and who understand the difference between self defense and moral depravity.

It is not moral depravity to do whatever is necessary to protect your citizens and your very existance from those who would take that from you.  It is moral depravity to hate a people so much that you would exterminate them from the face of the Earth.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 19, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Your alleged 'races' have more genetic differences within them than there are between the alleged 'averages' of those alleged races.   In fact there are no such things, outside the fantasies of racists.   Grow up!
> 
> Yes, my education does allow me to discuss 'Celts' without reading up old racist fantasies about these tall/short, fair/dark red-headed people.   The only basis for the whole tottery narrative comes from a Roman confusion about where the source of the Danube lay.   As I suggested to another grumpy person, you might try reading Stephen Oppenheimer's 'The Origins of the British'.   'Celtic' is, as I think we really agree, is a linguistic term, and should be left as that.   Linguistically I am sort-of-Celtic;  politically I am a Cymro/British citizen (in official fantasy subject to a Queen of German background);  genetically I am, like most British people, closest to the Basques.   These various categories should be kept apart and examined individually.   Are the Jamaicans German because they speak a Germanic language?  Light-skinned and fair and that?



I see.  I need to grow up.  Don't believe historical documentation ... believe Rhys.  How could I EVER have thought to ask for more?



> I know perfectly well why there is a Zionist state, thank you:  it is because a small minority of the persons-regarded-by-others-as-Jews (whether religious or not) despaired of living as civilized people in a Europe growing less civilized and more hostile daily.   They decided to imitate their barbarous neighbours by setting up their own racist state, stealing someone else's country to do it in, and that despairing course is, in their circumstances _then_, understandable.   But for Hitler and the gross failure of the US and the UK to take on the survivors or his murderous career, these fanatics would have remained more obviously the handful of nutty weirdoes they always were, but in the circumstances 'Israel' was at least somewhere to go.   It is, of course, as you imply, a big ghetto.   You are quite correct in blaming other Europeans for its creation, but it manifestly does not fulfil its purpose:  no-one, as I've argued before, is the better or the safer for its existence, and it may yet succeed in reviving the anti-Jewish feeling the Belsen pictures killed stone dead.   The sooner it is replaced by a non-racist state with international guarantees, the safer everyone will be.



Nice little bit of revisionism to support your agenda.  The League of Nations partitioned Palestine, a state within Transjordan, a puppet nation of the Ottoman Empire.  The Ottoman's were on the losing side of a war.  Too bad for them.  And too bad for any the Ottoman puppets.  By the rules of the day, to the victor went the spoils.

The Israelis/Jews would probably argue that "no one is the better or the safer for its existence" comment.  There also is no "may succeed in reviving the anti-Jewish feeling ..."  When did it ever fully go away?  The fall of the Third Reich only brought about an end to the open extermination of a people based on their religion.

This board alone has more than a couple of people who represent a mindest that villfies and twists Israel defending itself as if they should just march into the Red Sea and make all the Jew-haters happy.  

Israel exists.  It isn't going away.  The entire ME will be destroyed before that happens, and in that destruction, so too will the rest of world go from the fallout.  

So while you want to sit here acting as if you have a finger on the problem at the intellectual level, you forgot to include reality in your hypothesis.  

I sure wish I was as smart as you.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 20, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> Israel exists.  It isn't going away.  The entire ME will be destroyed before that happens, and in that destruction, so too will the rest of world go from the fallout.



See what I said earlier about the zionists imitating German nationalism right up to that bunker in Berlin!   There will, of course, be a sensible settlement  as soon as the US stops subsidising and defending every crime these racists choose to commit.


----------



## José (Jul 20, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> Perhaps you would like to point out the many instances in which Israel has attacked Palestinians without provocation?



You mean like all those children and sometimes even harmless grandmothers who are shot and killed by Israeli soldiers because they dared to get too close to the walls and eletric fences that surround Gaza?

Or do you want me to cite the more than 3000 thousand palestinians who were killed from 1948 to 1950 (before the first barriers were built) trying to return to their towns and villages after the war?

What was the excuse to kill palestinian civilians in 48, Foxfyre?

There was no fundamentalist groups back then, no Hamas, Islamic Jihad to serve as a convenient scapegoat.

There wasnt even the palestinian armed struggle, not even the secular PLO.

If you cant see the moral depravity in a racist dictatorship that shoots refugees trying to return to their towns and villages your mind is even more screwed than I thought.


----------



## José (Jul 20, 2008)

But this is not a problem for someone hellbent on legitimising a state racist to the core so  the israeli national myth says that the palestinian refugees left their homes for &#8220;genocidal reasons&#8221;.

According to the official narrative, when jewish refugees left their towns and villages just before the war of 48 and moved to coastal cities they were just scared civilians trying to save their lives by fleeing a warzone but when Palestinians did the same the myth says they were bloodthirsty arabs waiting for the jews to be slaughtered.

*Civilian populations have always fled warzones since the first prehistoric war.*

The selective reasoning behind the myth is pitiful. It can&#8217;t even maintain a bare modicum of coherency.


----------



## José (Jul 20, 2008)

But the myth serves its purpose:

Legitimising the fact that Israel has been an apartheid state from day one.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 20, 2008)

Rhys said:


> See what I said earlier about the zionists imitating German nationalism right up to that bunker in Berlin!   There will, of course, be a sensible settlement  as soon as the US stops subsidising and defending every crime these racists choose to commit.



Nothing to see.  Anti-Jewish propaganda isn't really worth a read.

There will be a sensible settlement as soon as people stop supporting a "nation" of people that voted for a terrorist organization to represent them to the world as their government and wage war indiscriminately against women and children and anything else they're sure can't fight back.  

Your backwards-assed accusations are just THAT.  Nothing more.  The racists would be the ones waging a war of extermination, not the ones waging war in self-defense.  

When you blow away all the smoke and mirrors, you and those like you support a band of murdering thugs waging a war of genocide against a people who don't think and act like them.  

No matter how you dress it up, the Arabs are the bad guys, and YOU their supporter.  Keep on lying to yourself all you want, but you need to stop short when it comes to blowing that smoke us MY ass.  I ain't buying it.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 20, 2008)

José;723795 said:
			
		

> But this is not a problem for someone hellbent on legitimising a state racist to the core so  the israeli national myth says that the palestinian refugees left their homes for genocidal reasons.
> 
> According to the official narrative, when jewish refugees left their towns and villages just before the war of 48 and moved to coastal cities they were just scared civilians trying to save their lives by fleeing a warzone but when Palestinians did the same the myth says they were bloodthirsty arabs waiting for the jews to be slaughtered.
> 
> ...



You got that selective reasoning myth right.  You twisted fucks supporting criminals with your selective reasoning that flies in the face of all evidence defies all logic and facts.

A murdering, scumbag Egyptian criminal decides he's got one-billionth a drop of "Palestinian" blood in him and rounds a band of like-minded ne'er-do-wells and begins waging an indiscriminant war of genocide against a people and before all is said and done, nitwits like you have given the "Grandaddy of Modern Day Terrorism" the Nobel Peace Prize.

Just fucking brilliant.  What do you do for an encore?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 20, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> Nothing to see.  Anti-Jewish propaganda isn't really worth a read.
> 
> There will be a sensible settlement as soon as people stop supporting a "nation" of people that voted for a terrorist organization to represent them to the world as their government and wage war indiscriminately against women and children and anything else they're sure can't fight back.
> 
> ...



As always with you nazi types, all will be well if _all those others_ stop making claims to humanity and human rights and just quietly accept slavery or die, and if their supporters learn to tell the Big Lie you favour.   If you could just once stop ranting and look at the figures you will see at once who the exterminators are - the terrorist 'state' that exists on US subsidies and total support.   Let's quote the figures again:  since 2,000 the zionists have killed 4,830 Palestinians  and 982 Palestinian children against 119 settler children killed by the Resistance.   Racists like yourself, of course, don't care, because Master Race lives are infinitely more valuable than the lives of us ordinary earthlings.   We supported the 'terrorist' French Resistance against your predecessors, amazingly unimpressed by the nazis giving them that label, and it is the same now.   Because you ask us to sympathise with those poor, delicate, flowerlike stormtroopers and childmurderers who call themselves after the people of the Old Testament, it doesn't mean we will, any more than we would accept the rights of, say, the UN to give _our_ countries to someone else.   The trouble with you, Goebbels, is that you've been able to silence opposition for too long:  all you can do is rant.   Obviously no-one is in favour of atrocities, but, as always, the answer is to abolish colonialism and its crappy propaganda and make a sensible AGREED NOT IMPOSED non-racist settlement between _people_.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 20, 2008)

Ya.. it's to bad the pals have a martyr call to get behind in order to rationalize violence and death, eh?


remind you of ANYONE?


Again, if you can rationalize a JEWISH israel then why don't you have a problem rationalizing an ARYAN, or NEGRO for that matter, state of Texas?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 20, 2008)

Maybe you should have thought this out, Rhys, back when you helped the Nazis exterminate Jews...how many Jews are dead because your people helped the Nazis? I'm guessing it's a bit higher than the deaths you are attributing to the Israelis. And since the Nazis lost, your people lost as well.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 20, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Maybe you should have thought this out, Rhys, back when you helped the Nazis exterminate Jews...how many Jews are dead because your people helped the Nazis? I'm guessing it's a bit higher than the deaths you are attributing to the Israelis. And since the Nazis lost, your people lost as well.



So Rhys himself helped the Nazis? Hows that for making generalizations about people.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 20, 2008)

Yurt said:


> i understand that jews started buying the land as far back as 1870's.  the land was considered worthless by arabs/muslims....and has been considered worthless since muhammad was rejected by the jews in jerusalem (about 1400 years ago) and then muhammad had a "divine" thought to now have prayer towards mecca.  allah, all knowing....
> 
> muslims hate jews



1.  dildodick is really racist.  I saw yo quote in one of his posts and wanted to ask you a question so I searched all his posts and BOY OH BOY does he have a lot to say about jews.

2.  the problem isn't  jew, muslim, christian, black, white, women, men, gays, straights, pro life, choice, etc.  its rich vs poor.  

3.  you said israel "purchase" palistine, or purchased israel?  my question is, who did they buy it from?  I always thought they just occupied it.. But I could be wrong.


----------



## Reality (Jul 20, 2008)

jillian said:


> The difference is, he doesn't liken zionism to racism or nazism or apartheid.  Nor does he promote the idea of jews living subjugated to Arabs in a one-state solution.



This insistence that a one-state solution is somehow immoral and racist is absurd and is the primary reason why you get into these exchanges of "you a fascist no you're a fascist." Stop it. 

600,000 people died in the Civil War in our own country. Is the south any more subjugated to Washington than the north today? Jews and Muslims lived in relative peace for centuries, at least with less violence and suffering that today, and Israel has lived in relative peace for very short amounts of time with its neighbors (1999 for example). There is no reason to call people antisemitic for thinking that a single state in a semi-autonomous republic, with administration of each BOTH IN JERUSALEM, that can find a way to work together enough to not kill each other won't make things a lot better than today. You can disagree without calling me antisemitic.  



> That's the difference between someone who's concerned about the issue and someone who's hiding their anti-semitism behind some anti-Israel agenda.



Israel does not represent all Jews. Stop it. Zionism is not Judaism. Stop it. 



> So it depends on which side of that line you fall.



How about not keeping your line calling people antisemites on a fucking hot key.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 20, 2008)

Reality said:


> This insistence that a one-state solution is somehow immoral and racist is absurd and is the primary reason why you get into these exchanges of "you a fascist no you're a fascist." Stop it.



I do not think it is racist, or immoral. I just think it is a bad Idea that will lead to more violence on both sides, not less.


----------



## Reality (Jul 20, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I do not think it is racist, or immoral. I just think it is a bad Idea that will lead to more violence on both sides, not less.



Lebanon is no Disney World, don't get me wrong. But look at the country's civil war (in my opinion the most complicated conflict to understand politically), and look at the country's history since 1990. Its not great, but its much better. Taif brought all these people together in a power sharing agreement and while Lebanon still has tons of issues, Palestinian refugees still on the list, its a lot better than 25 years ago. Its not utopia but if the Palestinians and Israelis could get along even as well as Lebanon's Shiites and Maronites, it might seem damn near that in comparison to the greater part of the last 60 years.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 20, 2008)

Reality said:


> Lebanon is no Disney World, don't get me wrong. But look at the country's civil war (in my opinion the most complicated conflict to understand politically), and look at the country's history since 1990. Its not great, but its much better. Taif brought all these people together in a power sharing agreement and while Lebanon still has tons of issues, Palestinian refugees still on the list, its a lot better than 25 years ago. Its not utopia but if the Palestinians and Israelis could get along even as well as Lebanon's Shiites and and Maronites, it might seem damn near that in comparison the the greater part of the last 60 years.




It is better? brought them together? Did you ever notice that Lebanon used to be Majority Christian and is now Majority Muslim. Did you ever ask yourself why. Hezbollah is systematically driving out the Christians, and using violence to control the government. Hardly Disney world is right. It is a hell hole.

we simply rarely hear about how bad it is in Lebanon anymore, mainly because Israel is no longer backing the Christians in a civil war, and therefore the Media no longer cares about it.

http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/2008/05/lebanon_the_ble.php


----------



## roomy (Jul 20, 2008)

He's a fucking moron, he has bought into the terrorism route, fuck him and his latest cause celebre, he's a thick racist bastard.


----------



## Reality (Jul 20, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> It is better? brought them together? Did you ever notice that Lebanon used to be Majority Christian and is now Majority Muslim. Did you ever ask yourself why. Hezbollah is systematically driving out the Christians, and using violence to control the government. Hardly Disney world is right. It is a hell hole.



At least 10% of the population being Palestinian refugees will change the dynamic of any country, citizens or not. Lebanon has population growth and the birth rate among Muslims is higher than among Christians. 



> Over 900,000 Lebanese emigrated between the outbreak of civil war in 1975 and 2001 (about 45% during the last decade of Syrian tutelage).[17] Although it was once assumed that a majority of these recent emigrants are Christian, one study estimates the percentage departure rates within each confession as 22% of Sunnis, 21% of Shiites, 21% of Maronites, 23% of Greek Orthodox Christians and 15% of Druze.[18] A 2006 study conducted by the Lebanese Emigration Research Center at Notre Dame University (in Lebanon) found that emigration is equally sought by Muslims (59.7%) and Christians (61.3%), and for virtually the same socio-political reasons





> In 1971, Shiites showed the highest fertility rate of 3.8, followed by Sunnis (2.8), (Maronite and non-Maronite) Catholics (2), Druze (1.8) and non-Catholic Christians (1.7).[20] By 1988, according to one projection, the percentage of Shiites in Lebanon had risen to 32%, while the number of Maronites had dwindled to 17%



http://www.mideastmonitor.org/issues/0801/0801_2.htm


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 20, 2008)

Reality said:


> At least 10% of the population being Palestinian refugees will change the dynamic of any country, citizens or not. Lebanon has population growth and the birth rate among Muslims is higher than among Christians.



Ah so they are just breeding them out, it has nothing to do with the Christians losing the civil war eh.

At least you did not dispute that Hezbollah enforces it's will on the Government through violence and fear.

So when you brought up Lebanon, were you suggesting that Israel and the Palestinians should look forward to being like Lebanon? 

The near constant violence and strife in Lebanon is a great argument against a 1 state solution in Israel, Not for it. IMO anyways.


----------



## José (Jul 20, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Reality*
> This insistence that a one-state solution is somehow immoral and racist is absurd and is the primary reason why you get into these exchanges of "you a fascist no you're a fascist." Stop it.
> 
> 600,000 people died in the Civil War in our own country. Is the south any more subjugated to Washington than the north today? Jews and Muslims lived in relative peace for centuries, at least with less violence and suffering that today, and Israel has lived in relative peace for very short amounts of time with its neighbors (1999 for example). There is no reason to call people antisemitic for thinking that a single state in a semi-autonomous republic, with administration of each BOTH IN JERUSALEM, that can find a way to work together enough to not kill each other won't make things a lot better than today. You can disagree without calling me antisemitic.



What a fantastic, tremendously lucid post, Reality.

The first step towards the democratisation of Palestine is to do away with the grotesque, childish caricatures of the palestinian people that prevail in the West: a horde of irrational arabs, murderous monsters determined to exterminate the jewish population of Palestine.

The second step is to work actively to neutralize the small minority of real shitheads who do not accept peaceful coexistence.

The only disagreement between us is that I deem necessary to invest a lot more in the security of the jewish people than a mere power sharing agreement following the lines of the lebanese case.

For a one state solution to work the international community has to address both *THE REAL AND THE IMAGINARY FEARS* of the jewish population of Palestine.

It is imperative that the international community comes up with a plan that satisfies the jewish paranoia with security 100%.

The history of anti semitism in the Middle East *PALES* when compared to Europe&#8217;s, but this doesn&#8217;t matter either, it&#8217;s not enought that the jewish people is safe, they have to *BELIEVE* they are safe.

So I firmly believe that the proposal of an international protectorate with a massive presence of foreign troops would create a better psychological climate for the jewish people finally accept the peaceful dismantlement of the jewish racial dictatorship (coupled with international pressure).

If José, a poor "cucaracha", conceived the reasonably fair plan I exposed in a previous post, just imagine what the most brilliant minds in the fields of political science, sociology, economics, defense etc, etc... can come up with working together.

The real problem is not the absence of reasonable plans but the total lack of political will on the part of the international community.

The big irony in all this controversy is that no one is actually stating Israel&#8217;s dismantlement should happen overnight and no one wants to see palestinian majority rule in Palestine following the south african model for the forseeable future. 

The only place you find the idea of palestinian majority rule following the south african model is in the posts of bigots who want to ridicule and discredit the idea of a new political configuration for Palestine based on equal rights in a unitary state.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 20, 2008)

José;724129 said:
			
		

> What a fantastic, tremendously lucid post, Reality.
> 
> The first step towards the democratisation of Palestine is to do away with the grotesque, childish caricatures of the palestinian people that prevail in the West: a horde of irrational arabs, murderous monsters determined to exterminate the jewish population of Palestine.
> 
> ...



Who is gonig to pay for this and what makes you think they would accept the presence of foreign troops on their soil ?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 21, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Maybe you should have thought this out, Rhys, back when you helped the Nazis exterminate Jews...how many Jews are dead because your people helped the Nazis? I'm guessing it's a bit higher than the deaths you are attributing to the Israelis. And since the Nazis lost, your people lost as well.



Poor Ravi.   It is okay to be a parrot, if that's what you want to be, but where's the joy in being a half-witted parrot?   The racist state that calls itself 'Israel' has extremely little to do with the Jews the nazis murdered, and my family was, of course, very actively anti-Hitler at a time when it mattered, unlike the ancestors of the present American Israel-backers, who were pretty solidly in favour of the Fuhrer.   Thinking it over, you sound more like the _sheep_ in 1984.   'Auntie C might!   Baa baa baa!'   And bah to you too, you silly old chorusbleater!


----------



## editec (Jul 21, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Beautiful posting, editec. Do take care, or we shall be having a civilized discussion around here!


 
Oh, I think we're mostly safe from _that_ happening. 



> I think that the key to the problem will come, as in the Six Counties, when the most extreme elements on either side can get to talk seriously _to one another_.


 
I was given to believe that the Northern Irish question didn't really start to get solved until the non-activists (Catholic and Protestant women mostly) finally got so freaking fed up with the juvenile delinquints and criminals hiding behind that mask of orange or green patriotism, that they stood up and said ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! _Either stop blowing up pubs in our names or know that the people you claim to be working for are YOUR ENEMIES._



> On the model of Ireland I dread, otherwise, the hundreds of years of bloody pay-back that will be required for what's been done.


 
700 years of exploitation and occupation tends to cause some hard feelings, I suppose. One hundred years and counting in that land called Israel by some and Palestine by others.



> Nothing is more frightening than good boys and girs who _believe_ (and exaggerate) their parents version of the past - and I've spend a good deal of time talking to Irish-Americans and, indeed, the odd IRA volunteer, discovering that.


 
Me too. I actually love Irish Americans, for the most part, having lived in Boston for well over a decade. Why I remember back when the Plough and Stars in Cambridge was always a good place to find some American-Irish patriot who could find you that fully automatic weapon to complete your collection. 



> In these circumstances it is a great mistake to know some history - it tends to spoil the party entirely.


 
Yes, history done well does tends to put the lie to the excesses of zealots of every stripe, doesn't it? Now wonder few of us are not welcome in polite company. We keep raining on their parades and calling it ..._rain._



> I strive for the Old Testament Prophet note mostly, hoping it may remind people of where they're coming from. It'll get me lynched in the finish, I'm afraid. But, me, I don't mind being _buried_ in France.


 
Being buried in France probably isn't so bad... as long as you're already dead, of course. Jim Morrison doesn't seem to mind.


----------



## editec (Jul 21, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> > Nice little bit of revisionism to support your agenda. The League of Nations partitioned Palestine, a state within Transjordan, a puppet nation of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman's were on the losing side of a war. Too bad for them. And too bad for any the Ottoman puppets. By the rules of the day, to the victor went the spoils.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Rhys (Jul 21, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I do not think it is racist, or immoral. I just think it is a bad Idea that will lead to more violence on both sides, not less.



Evil begets evil, I think:  the IRA campaign in the Six Counties and Britain was - from one point of view - entirely justifiable.   Who gave the Pope the right to give Ireland to the King of England or any English/Scottish government the right to settle foreigners on Irish land, and kill, kill, kill?  So fight to the death!   The Orange resistance was also justifiable:  they are wanting to impose their religion on us, the Protestant population of the Republic has fallen from 13% to 6% since Independence, and they will kill, kill, kill us, those _animals_, for even _remembering our war dead_.   So, backs to the wall, and fight to the death!   It will, however (they discover after years of killing) be difficult to exterminate  the Protestant minority in Ireland or the Roman Catholic minority in the Six counties.   Let us have two states, then!

That didn't work and it never will.   'You have stolen my beloved childhood home!'  'You have stolen the holy places where our heroes fell!'   We shall fight to the death till they are returned!

One State, agreed by all, with equal rights for all.   What else could conceivably work?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 21, 2008)

editec said:


> I was given to believe that the Northern Irish question didn't really start to get solved until the non-activists (Catholic and Protestant women mostly) finally got so freaking fed up with the juvenile delinquints and criminals hiding behind that mask of orange or green patriotism, that they stood up and said ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! _Either stop blowing up pubs in our names or know that the people you claim to be working for are YOUR ENEMIES._



It helped,but the key thing was that the War was at a stalemate.   Neither the Social Democrats and the Official Unionists. however, could _ever_ make a deal, because they could always be attacked from a more extreme position on their own side (the key to Republican survival from the Treaty on,incidentally, a peculiar version of Divine right).   Once ambitious  Democratic Unionist and Sinn Fein politicians were in charge, their Will to Power became one with the popular will for peace, and the killing could, at last, stop.


----------



## editec (Jul 21, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I do not think it is racist, or immoral. I just think it is a bad Idea that will lead to more violence on both sides, not less.


 
I can sign on to that, too.

A single state would be a great idea if the Jews and Palestinains didn't hate one another.

Ain't gonna happen, though.

But two VIABLE states are needed, and I see NO way that is going to happen the way the PA is set up now, either.


----------



## editec (Jul 21, 2008)

Reality said:


> Lebanon is no Disney World, don't get me wrong. But look at the country's civil war (in my opinion the most complicated conflict to understand politically), and look at the country's history since 1990. Its not great, but its much better. Taif brought all these people together in a power sharing agreement and while Lebanon still has tons of issues, Palestinian refugees still on the list, its a lot better than 25 years ago. Its not utopia but if the Palestinians and Israelis could get along even as well as Lebanon's Shiites and Maronites, it might seem damn near that in comparison to the greater part of the last 60 years.


 
Asute observation.  

But Lebanon got drawn into the mess because of the Palestian refugees who used that state as the base to attack Israel.

The Lebanaese government at the time was in no way supporting those actions, but eventually teh Isrealis got tired of it and so they invaded Lebanaon, thus destabilizing the delicate balance that nation had, too.

What a remarkable bad idea was to create a colony for Europes Jews to take over that area.

Can't blame the Zionists  for wanting their ancient homeland back, of course, and I credit most of the early Zionists for understanding that they needed to integrate themselves into that place, if for no other reason than to not screw it up for the indiginous Jewish population that had been there all along

Sadly, the events that unfolded in Europe post 1918 made those best laid plans go terribly astray.


----------



## editec (Jul 21, 2008)

José;724129 said:
			
		

> The real problem is not the absence of reasonable plans but the total lack of political will on the part of the international community.


 
The real problem is not the absence of reasonable plans but the total lack of political will on the part of the international community.

Some things are just worth repeating.

Perhaps if we say them enough it will get through the heads of those sitting on the fence.

Of course, I have no hope that it make a tinkers damn difference to those who are ethnocentrically disposed to take one side over the other.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 21, 2008)

An international community that, ironically, can fathom a "NATURAL DESIRE FOR SEGREGATION", dude?


read any good quotes lately?


----------



## roomy (Jul 21, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Evil begets evil, I think:  the IRA campaign in the Six Counties and Britain was - from one point of view - entirely justifiable.   Who gave the Pope the right to give Ireland to the King of England or any English/Scottish government the right to settle foreigners on Irish land, and kill, kill, kill?  So fight to the death!   The Orange resistance was also justifiable:  they are wanting to impose their religion on us, the Protestant population of the Republic has fallen from 13% to 6% since Independence, and they will kill, kill, kill us, those _animals_, for even _remembering our war dead_.   So, backs to the wall, and fight to the death!   It will, however (they discover after years of killing) be difficult to exterminate  the Protestant minority in Ireland or the Roman Catholic minority in the Six counties.   Let us have two states, then!
> 
> That didn't work and it never will.   'You have stolen my beloved childhood home!'  'You have stolen the holy places where our heroes fell!'   We shall fight to the death till they are returned!
> 
> One State, agreed by all, with equal rights for all.   What else could conceivably work?




And from anther point of view Britain would have been justified in dropping bombs on Northern Ireland, you fucking idiot.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 21, 2008)

editec said:


> I can sign on to that, too.
> 
> A single state would be a great idea if the Jews and Palestinains didn't hate one another.
> 
> ...




I agree 100%, I would add that it may require an international force to keep the 2 parties apart, and too keep both states viable. I would like to see Israel returned to the 67 Borders, and a the nation of Palestine set up in the west bank and gaza. However I would agree this is not likely to happen with the current leadership or Both Israel and the Palestinians.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 21, 2008)

as if whites and blacks didn't HATE one another.


get over yourselves and your rationalized segregation.  It's still racism.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 21, 2008)

Shogun said:


> as if whites and blacks didn't HATE one another.
> 
> 
> get over yourselves and your rationalized segregation.  It's still racism.



I disagree with all due respect sir


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 21, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I agree 100%, I would add that it may require an international force to keep the 2 parties apart, and too keep both states viable. I would like to see Israel returned to the 67 Borders, and a the nation of Palestine set up in the west bank and gaza. However I would agree this is not likely to happen with the current leadership or Both Israel and the Palestinians.



You don't seriously think the UN is going to send in more observers do you? Again-Who is going to pay for this force that would have no clue what it's doing ?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 21, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> You don't seriously think the UN is going to send in more observers do you? Again-Who is going to pay for this force that would have no clue what it's doing ?



No idea bud, Was just telling you what I think it would take to keep the peace over there. I never claimed to know how we would actually pull it off. Personally I think nothing will ever change over there, and in 100 years we will still be talking about the Arab/Israeli conflict. Assuming we are even still here of course.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 21, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I disagree with all due respect sir



dammit.. now how can I call you names with a reply like that?


for real though, dude...  whites and blacks HATED each other during segregation.  MANY still do.  to say that jews and muslims CANT live together is no different than saying the same in the south circa 1967.  WE DID. THEY CAN.  It;s just a matter of removing the excuses for inequality.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 21, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I agree 100%, I would add that it may require an international force to keep the 2 parties apart, and too keep both states viable. I would like to see Israel returned to the 67 Borders, and a the nation of Palestine set up in the west bank and gaza. However I would agree this is not likely to happen with the current leadership or Both Israel and the Palestinians.



!!! Agreed 110%.

A one state solution is never going to work. It might've worked at one point, but the best possible solution would just be to split up peacefully and quickly. There's nothign segregationalist about that. The Soviet Union split up, Czechoslovakia split up, Israel can be split up, so long as it's 1967 borders. Palestine should be it's own independent state if Palestinians so choose. It's the only real way to stop abuses on both sides.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 21, 2008)

You silly bastards would have given Governor wallace and stom thurman a fucking HARDON.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 21, 2008)

Palestinians:Israelis =/= Blacks:Whites. It's a totally different monster. I don't know if there was ever a serious proposal for Blacks to form their own country, but most of them (I think) wished to remain part of the US, and fought for equal liberties within the same country because _obviously_ they weren't going to get an independent piece of land in the US. Palestinians don't want equal rights in Israel, they want to be a sovereign nation in a free Palestine. Why would you be against that? Granted, obviously it'd be unbearable in a bantustan-like settlement chopped up into pieces, but if the vast majority of palestines (and arabs in general in the middle east) want to have their own country and agree with the 1967 borders (not with a archipelago state surrounded by checkpoints in the middle of Israel), then I don't see how that could be equated with the situation of Blacks in the first half of the 20th Century in the states.


----------



## coolgeee (Jul 21, 2008)

Who cares what people think...speak your mind.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 21, 2008)

coolgeee said:


> Who cares what people think...speak your mind.



I am sure people here will tell you I do


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 21, 2008)

^ He does.


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

Heya, Dillo!!

Nice to see you again, buddy.

Do you remember our first debate when I joined the board in 2004?

Comrade and ajwps defending Israel...

That palestinian canadian guy with a weird nick, 03486, or something like that, and I advocating racial equality in Palestine...

And you in the middle of the brawl, playing devils advocate for good measure (as you always do).

Boy, that debate went down in History as *The Mother Of All Smackdowns*!!


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

Sorry, dillo, couldn't reply to you sooner. I&#8217;m a hunter-gatherer, if I don&#8217;t leave my cave every morning and kill an antelope a day I will starve to death and then you&#8217;ll never read my posts again!!


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

> Originally posted by *dilloduck*
> Who is gonig to pay for this and what makes you think they would accept the presence of foreign troops on their soil ?



First, what makes me think theyre gonna accept this plan.

As I said before, dillo, as far as the jewish population of Palestine is concerned, the *psychological perception of security* is even more important than reality.

What Im basically proposing is the international community approaching Israel as an impartial negotiator and promising to guarantee the security of the jewish people.

*You dont have to worry about palestinian majority rule, well provide security for both ethnic groups and will only leave the region when you tell us to do so.*

I believe this pledge would soften much of the resistance against the establishment of a functional state in Palestine by removing the palestinian demographic threat from the horizon until things settle down.

It will help but obviously it wont be enough so the real answer to your question is:

The international community would convince Israel to desegregate the same way they convinced South Africa, through arm twisting, a mix of diplomatic pressure, santions, boycotts, etc, etc... Israel coudnt survive international isolation, even ultra zionists concede this fact.

As I said before, the political will of the international community to implement a plan like this is currently non existent but so was the political will to pressure South Africa in the 50s. 

Mark my words, the same international community who came up with the money to establish a half-assed international protectorate in Kosovo, a god forsaken part of world with 0 geo-political importance will *EASILY* find the money to finance a protectorate in a vital region like Palestine, once the political will is there.

Im not downplaying the importance of bringing peace to Kosovo, far from it. Human suffering is the same everywhere.

Im just recognising a fact: 

The palestinian issue is, by far, the most emotional issue in the arab and muslim world.

Nothing that happens in the Balkans enrages arabs to the point of knocking down american skyscrappers, but what happens in Palestine does.

Ill justify the money spent on this protectorate using your own words to ajwps many years ago (referring to the United States):

*Our support for Israel puts us in the line of fire.*

So America is undoubtedly one of the countries that would benefit the most from the desegregation of Palestine but the entire world, from Saudi Arabia to China, would gain with a more stable Middle East.

The cost-benefit analysis clearly shows that the investment would be peanuts.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 21, 2008)

José;724874 said:
			
		

> Sorry, dillo, couldn't reply to you sooner? Im a hunter-gatherer, if I dont leave my cave every morning and kill an antelope a day I will starve to death and then youll never read my posts again!!



np--I gotta kill one every once in awhile too. The guvment can't hunt worth a shit much less cook.


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

But Ill be 100% honest with you, dillo. 

The peaceful dismantlement of Israel is gonna be a hard medicine for the jewish population of Israel to swallow.

The democratisation of Palestine through an international protectorate would mean that, once again in the history of the jewish people, the safety of jews would be in foreign hands.

Once again, the jewish people would depend on foreign powers to guarantee their safety.

It was hard for afrikaners to dismantle the white racial dictatorship they set up in Africa and I wont hide under the carpet the fact that its gonna be painful for the jewish population of Israel, too.

The state of Israel exists on the premise that a group of human beings, by virtue of their common ethnic affiliation, are entitled to more rights than the natives of the land.

The continued existence of Israel cannot be disassociated from the enforcement of this basic act of ethnic supremacism:

*A group of human beings denying another group of human beings their right to live in their homeland.*

Anyone who thinks Israel has any right to exist is a fully fledged racist more than ready to join the KKK or any other supremacist organisation.

So the peaceful dismantlement of the jewish racial dictatorship is the only moral thing to do. But this doesnt change the fact that its gonna be a bitter pill for the jewish people to swallow.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 21, 2008)

José;724877 said:
			
		

> First, what makes me think theyre gonna accept this plan.



and what in gods name makes you think either state would accept a single state solution?


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 21, 2008)

José;724877 said:
			
		

> First, what makes me think theyre gonna accept this plan.
> 
> As I said before, dillo, as far as the jewish population of Palestine is concerned, the *psychological perception of security* is even more important than reality.
> 
> ...



Israel will never allow an international force. Never.


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

> Originally posted by *GunnyL*
> Israel exists. It isn't going away. The entire ME will be destroyed before that happens, and in that destruction, so too will the rest of world go from the fallout.





> Originally posted by *editec*
> Now, is that a lament or a promise? Hard to tell.



Its neither, editec. This is what we call in Political Science, *pathological political thinking*.

The idea that the triumph of a given ideology or the end of a given regime is worse than the nuclear destruction of our species.

Examples of pathological political thinking:

*Better dead than red.* 

*Israel will continue to exist even if it means the nuclear destruction of human civilisation.* 

etc, etc, etc...


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> Of course, I have no hope that it make a tinkers damn difference to those who are ethnocentrically disposed to take one side over the other.



*ABSOLUTELY AND TOTALLY WRONG*, editec.

Partisans are people who support the continued existence of a jewish racial dictatorship in Western Palestine that keeps the palestinian people herded like cattle in Gaza and the West Bank. These people &#8220;*are ethnocentrically disposed to take the jewish side*&#8221;.

Partisans are people who support the ideals of HAMAS and ISLAMIC JIHAD: the establishment of a muslim theocratic state in Palestine where the jewish population will be protected as &#8220;guests&#8221; of the islamic state. The jewish people do not want to live under islamic theocratic rule and I support them 100%. These people &#8220;*are ethnocentrically disposed to take the arab side*&#8221;.

People who support the establishment of a non confessional state with equal rights for all peoples who call Palestine their homeland *ARE NOT PARTISANS BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION*.

Much on the contrary, these individuals are the only ones who can be called impartial and moderate people.

Contrary to popular belief, radicals are the ones who justify jewish supremacist on the palestinian people through the denial of the right of return OR palestinian supremacism on the jewish people through the establishment of an islamic theocratic state.

Moderates and impartial observers are people who support a democratic state with equal rights for jews and arabs alike.

I strongly urge you to reconsider your definition of impartiality, editec.


----------



## Glori.B (Jul 21, 2008)

José;724885 said:
			
		

> Its neither, editec. This is what we call in Political Science, *pathological political thinking*.
> 
> The idea that the triumph of a given ideology or the end of a given regime is worse than the nuclear destruction of our species.
> 
> ...



live free or die...


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

> Originally posted by *dilloduck*
> Israel will never allow an international force. Never.



You're a "crypto-racist", dillo.

The only reason you don't come out of the closet is because of the current climate in America where racism is not socially acceptable.

As you say, racism in 21st century America is not "kosher".

But if someday America herds its entire black and hispanic population in Florida and declares it an independent state I'm sure you'll be here giving your enthusiastic support. 

Sorry if I'm more frank than I should be. 

But to paraphrase good, old Barry "I love you just the way you are, buddy".


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 21, 2008)

José;724900 said:
			
		

> You're a "crypto-racist", dillo.
> 
> The only reason you don't come out of the closet is because of the current climate in America where racism is not socially acceptable.
> 
> ...



Crypto-racist ?  Have you been reading some shit at the library ??  I just said Israel (the country) will not accept an international force. Do you think they will ?


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Charles Main*
> and what in gods name makes you think either state would accept a single state solution?



Chuck

I will soon create a thread covering all the major issues of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Wait and see.


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

> Originally posted by *dilloduck*
> Do you think they will ?



I don't know if this is gonna be the couse History will follow, dillo.

The "fast track" way: the dismantlement of Israel and the establishment of an international protectorate.

Or the "slow track" way: Israel's gradual evolution from a jewish "demographic" state to a state of citizens.

Either way, the end result will be the same.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 21, 2008)

José;724903 said:
			
		

> Chuck
> 
> I will soon create a thread covering all the major issues of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
> 
> Wait and see.



I will be holding on with baited breath.......












NOT!!!


----------



## José (Jul 21, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Charles Main*
> I will be holding on with baited breath.......



LOL,

I came to the conclusion that I just can't postpone the mega thread I've been planning for so long, Chuck.

The level of knowledge about the palestinian people displayed by the members of the board, including you, is unbelievably low.

Just take a look at Epsilon Delta's post, for example. He simply doesn't understand that a palestinian who accepts the ethnic cleansing of western palestine may just as well go live in Baghdad because he's not a palestinian anymore.

Delta, buddy, don't take this the wrong way.

You seem to be an expert on the greek alphabet but you're totally clueless about the palestinian people.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 21, 2008)

José;724913 said:
			
		

> LOL,
> 
> I came to the conclusion that I just can postpone the mega thread I've been planning for so long, Chuck.
> 
> ...




And your level of Ignorance concerning Israel and the Israeli people is just as bad.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 22, 2008)

José;724913 said:
			
		

> LOL,
> 
> I came to the conclusion that I just can't postpone the mega thread I've been planning for so long, Chuck.
> 
> ...



I don't accept the ethnic cleansing of any place, José. If anyone is clueless here  it's you. (Ok, I lie, most of us are pretty clueless here). The PA and most of the arab world have stated that the conditions for peace are a *two-state solution, an independent state of Palestine with no Israeli settlements and no walls inside Palestine, with Palestinian control of 
Palestinian water resources. *
I mean, seriously, anyone who denies that Palestinians want THEIR OWN STATE doesn't have a clue, whether it be the rightist extremists who support the occupation or these people (whom I didn't even know existed) that refuse to recognize that a free and independent Palestine based on 1967 borders would be the prefered choice of most Palestinians. 



			
				Arab Peace Initiative of March 28 said:
			
		

> The plan consists of a proposal to end the Arab-Israeli conflict. It offers Israel normalization of relations and comprehensive peace agreements with Arab countries in exchange for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all the Occupied Territories including the Golan Heights, and the recognition of "an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital," as well as a "just solution" for the Palestinian refugees.[1]
> 
> The initiative is based upon:
> 
> ...



Arab Peace Initiative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Arab Peace Inititative

United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United Nations Security Council Resolution 338 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Pretty much the same thing as above)

Generalmente estoy de acuerdo con usted en la mayoría de los casos, pero no en este. La verdad es que los Israelitas no pueden seguir despedazando a Palestina y la única manera de hacerlo es que Palestina sea un estado soverano.


----------



## Reality (Jul 22, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> Israel will never allow an international force. Never.



Then they can deal with the Iran treatment. Sanctions, international isolation, imports stopped, exports stopped. 

Oh wait, that's only for Muslims.


----------



## Reality (Jul 22, 2008)

José;724890 said:
			
		

> the ideals of HAMAS and ISLAMIC JIHAD: the establishment of a muslim theocratic state in Palestine where the jewish population will be protected as guests of the islamic state.



Hamas has stated it will accept any agreement passed by a referendum of the Palestinian people and stated while it held office in the PA that it does not seek to coerce, but instead encourage, Palestinians to live in accordance with Islamic principles. I'm not sure that moderate tone persists.


----------



## editec (Jul 22, 2008)

José;724890 said:
			
		

> *ABSOLUTELY AND TOTALLY WRONG*, editec.


 
_Damn!_ I was really trying to go for absolutely, but not _totally_ wrong.



> Partisans are people who support the continued existence of a jewish racial dictatorship in Western Palestine that keeps the palestinian people herded like cattle in Gaza and the West Bank. These people &#8220;*are ethnocentrically disposed to take the jewish side*&#8221;.


 
Ahhhh, _yeah!_



> Partisans are people who support the ideals of HAMAS and ISLAMIC JIHAD: the establishment of a muslim theocratic state in Palestine where the jewish population will be protected as &#8220;guests&#8221; of the islamic state. The jewish people do not want to live under islamic theocratic rule and I support them 100%. These people &#8220;*are ethnocentrically disposed to take the arab side*&#8221;.


 
_Okaaaay_, with you so far.



> People who support the establishment of a non confessional state with equal rights for all peoples who call Palestine their homeland *ARE NOT PARTISANS BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION*.


 
Not sure what a "non-confessional state" means, Jose, but as it regards this issue I think that partisans can be described as the all or nothing Arabs or Jewish positions we both recognize as the problem.



> Much on the contrary, these individuals are the only ones who can be called impartial and moderate people.


 
Oh, I get it. You thought I was calling _you_ an ARAB partisan or something, didn't you?

Well.. you do seem to be a partisan for a_ just society_ in that region, Jose.but you should know already that _so am I._ 

How to arrive at that , is the crux of the problem




> Contrary to popular belief, radicals are the ones who justify jewish supremacist on the palestinian people through the denial of the right of return OR palestinian supremacism on the jewish people through the establishment of an islamic theocratic state.


 
Oh I suspect that sanity about this issue, is fairly common except in places like this, where keyboard warriors vent their bile and frustration, Jose.

A LOT of people want justice for both the Jews and the Arabs, amigo. More than half the poulation, I suspect, regardless of party or poltical philosophy.



> Moderates and impartial observers are people who support a democratic state with equal rights for jews and arabs alike.


 
Yeah, and in the Mid East, those seeking just solutions probably nearly completely marginalized from power, too. 

Blessed are the peacemakers for theirs shall be the kingdom of heaven (and probably fairly soon, too since they're always targeted for destruction by everyone with an axe to grind nearly everywhere on earth)



> I strongly urge you to reconsider your definition of impartiality, editec.


 
Well, okay.

The moment you actually understand what my definition of impartiality is, I'll be happy to reconsider it.

Jose, you are kind of punchdrunk from battling with partisans in this place, too, that's obvious.

The fucking trolls here (those people who like to pit people agin' one aother, I mean, not the _real _partisans who are _honestly committed_ to their causes) really do TRY to keep the discussion from being real and attacking anyone who is honest is their _modus operandi._

How do they do that?

They post whatever the hell they think will inflame the passions of the partisans, and the mischaracterize what non-partisans are saying to enflame everyone's passions, too.

I wasn't on this board for more than a week before I was labeled and anti-semite, a socialist, and a liberal. Based on what? 

Based on jumped conclusions from punchdrunk players, that's what.

And those mislabeling are from people who I believe are _honest_ players but who assume that because something I wrote doesn't exactly jibe with their EXACT opinions I must therefore believe_ BLA BLA BLA, too._

None of us (but the trolls) are cardboard cut-outs of people, sport.

Complex issues like these have nuances, shadings, sublteties and sticking to what is written is the ONLY way to know what people think.

Those of us who are honest plays here have got to stop _leaping to conclusions about what the others think_ based on the mythical creatures that have been implanted in our heads from YEARS OF PROPAGANDA ABOUT THE ENEMY.

Just a thought, of course.

Discussing things honestly isn't nearly so much fun as imagining that we're on the side of good and anyone who disagrees is a monster.

oh yeah. one more thing.

I am impressed how many apparently decent people there are here TRYING to have have honest discussions.  TRYING to wade throught he thoughless hateful bullshit that some people post_ at them_ for no other reason than to YANK THEIR CHAINS.

Dismiss them, or ignore those obvious shitheads.

Responding _in kind_ is what they want.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 22, 2008)

You orchard arguement making motherfuckers and your "it's not the same, wahh wahh" copout ARE the reason there is still a conflict in that area.  If you don't think SOME blacks wnated segregation as well as white you need to go read something.  I suggest Colored People by Henry Louis Gates.  You seem to think that ALL jews or ALL arabs refuse to live together.   Meanwhile, and I hope the irony hasn't been missed so far on you Chuck, IF you insist that three seperate iraqi factions WORK TOGETHER TO FORM A SINGLE STATE as if THEY have gotten along any better than israel and pal, than whites and blacks.  

Indeed, you all are intellectual failures and have bend over for the sake of your own rationalized prejudices.  Your assumptions are no better than Strom Thruman's.  Your resolve is no better than Governor Wallace.  If your only reply is some goofy fucking "But it's DIFFERNET" then you have failed both yourself as critically thinking individuals and THEM despite your own history.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 22, 2008)

And, EDITIC, im not letting you off the hook, buddy.  I'll repost the quotes even if you dont respond.  You wanna play peacemaker?  You wanna bridge a gap?  You can't run away from the exact reflecting that your opinion here has with the LAST bunch of racist fiends who insisted that cultural segregation "is only natural".


Indeed, go ask William Joyce if he agrees with you.  What do you think his answer will be.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 22, 2008)

editec said:


> 700 years of exploitation and occupation tends to cause some hard feelings, I suppose. One hundred years and counting in that land called Israel by some and Palestine by others.



I think they've managed to get a fair bit more oppression into that first hundred years, and far more unequally.   After all, Irish-speakers had previously taken over control of Scotland and of two Welsh counties before  Norman adventurers got in on the act, and it was when the question became religious that there were land-grabs and foreign settlement in Ireland, whereas in Palestine it started with that. 



> Me too. I actually love Irish Americans, for the most part, having lived in Boston for well over a decade. Why I remember back when the Plough and Stars in Cambridge was always a good place to find some American-Irish patriot who could find you that fully automatic weapon to complete your collection.



I have drunk with all kinds of overseas Irish in all sorts of places, and had a great deal of fun, until the drink taken begins to turn sour, at which it is as well to make one's excuses and be off.   I was once pinned in a corner by a strange being of about five feet tall and eight feet wide, who wanted me to prove myself NOT to be an English Government spy.   This I had to do by pronouncing 'Llanelli' correctly.  I have, of course, no trouble with this task, but his hearing  was not of the best, and it was touch and go there awhile!



> Yes, history done well does tends to put the lie to the excesses of zealots of every stripe, doesn't it? Now wonder few of us are not welcome in polite company. We keep raining on their parades and calling it ..._rain.[/I_


_

The frightening thing, though, is that enthusiasts take any attempt to put them right as aggressive in the extreme - and that the emotive 'facts' are so muddled .   To leave Ireland and Palestine out of the discussion I give an example from my own Country.   Patriotism here tends to turn mainly on language - from the Annexation of 1536 for a fairly long period, English governments attempted to force us to speak English, while, fair play, also having translated the Bible and the Prayer Book into our language, which in fact saved Cymraeg, making it 'the Language of Heaven'.   The mass of people manful (and womanfully?) resisted their bullying, and it was only in the Twentieth Century that the majority became monoglot English.

Quite separately, in the Nineteenth Century, it became evident that, in the United Kingdom, only English speakers were going to Get On.   Realising this, a small minority of our people left for Chobut, but a high proportion of those who remained wanted their children to learn English as a second language, and one of the measures favoured was the 'Welsh Not', where anyone speaking the Language had a board hung around his neck until he (she?) could point to another malefactor, the one wearing the thing at the end of the day being caned.   Well, if I'd learned my Latin that way, it would probable be a great deal better than it is, I suppose.

The point of this long ramble is that this teaching-method was, at worst, the invention of particular teachers rather than the English Government, and in general many parents were all for it.   Nobody is alive now who was subjected to this either.   You should hear  the way people talk about it though!   They firmly believe it was part of an English plan to destroy us.   I once gave a lift to some Swedish students who'd visited the National Eisteddfod and been told about it as it it were still going on:  they were all for finding some passing Englishman and beating the hell out of him.   My own Father, in his cups, had access to some time machine that took him back to those days, though the school he attended was in fact run by his Welsh-speaking Father, and taught it to all its pupils!  Dad could still get bitter, however.

MY point is that, if so much rage can be created by such muddled History here, imagine what will be the results of the very, very real grievances of the highly talented and ethnically-cleansed Palestinians!   That is why I'm sure, whatever the opinion of the participants, that a two-state solution is unworkable:   every unemployed teenage idealist would be forever ready to strike back at the thieving, bullying swine, as in Ireland.   I wish some of our more idiotic zionist contributors could be make to sing 'The Patriot Game' in full before going into rant, really I do.    




			Being buried in France probably isn't so bad... as long as you're already dead, of course. Jim Morrison doesn't seem to mind.
		
Click to expand...


I have never tried it - as far as I know!_


----------



## editec (Jul 22, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I will be holding on with baited breath.......
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Good choice.

 Putting bait in your mouth seems highly unsanitary.

FYI:

*bated*     adj 1: held back; "we watched the daring feats of the acrobats with            bated breath"     2: diminished or moderated; "our bated enthusiasm"; "his bated        hopes"</PRE><!-- google_ad_section_end -->


----------



## José (Jul 22, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Epsilon Delta*
> I don't accept the ethnic cleansing of any place, José. If anyone is clueless here it's you. (Ok, I lie, most of us are pretty clueless here). The PA and most of the arab world have stated that the conditions for peace are a two-state solution, an independent state of Palestine with no Israeli settlements and no walls inside Palestine, with Palestinian control of Palestinian water resources.
> 
> I mean, seriously, anyone who denies that Palestinians want THEIR OWN STATE doesn't have a clue, whether it be the rightist extremists who support the occupation or these people (whom I didn't even know existed) that refuse to recognize that a free and independent Palestine based on 1967 borders would be the prefered choice of most Palestinians.



Have you ever heard Netanyahu&#8217; fantastic phrase, Delta?

*&#8220;The Palestinians say one thing in English and another thing in Arabic.&#8221;*

The PA is not a functional state/government, Delta, they depend on western donations to feed their people and they know exactly what the West wants to hear them saying.

I have 60 years of miserable failure of the 2 states solution to back up my claim that a palestinian arab cannot renounce their right to live in western Palestine and still be a palestinian.

What do you have to back up yours?

The empty rhetoric of a starving third world people begging the West for money.

I hope someday you understand that the palestinian cause is not about Jerusalem, &#8220;viable states&#8221;, a few inches of land here, a few inches of land there.

The palestinian cause is about the right of a displaced people to live anywhere they want in their historical homeland.



> Originally posted by *Epsilon Delta*
> Generalmente estoy de acuerdo con usted en la mayoría de los casos, pero no en este. La verdad es que los Israelitas no pueden seguir despedazando a Palestina y la única manera de hacerlo es que Palestina sea un estado soverano.



Excellent Spanish. You *"sound"* like a native. 

If only my English were that good.


----------



## José (Jul 22, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> The moment you actually understand what my definition of impartiality is, I'll be happy to reconsider it.
> 
> Jose, you are kind of punchdrunk from battling with partisans in this place, too, that's obvious.
> ...



Ok then, editec. 

You sound like a fair-minded western guy who sincerely still believes that someday in the future the palestinian people will drop their demand to live in Western Palestine.

Nothing I can say to you on the Internet will change your mind.

Only the passage of time will finally convince you (or your children, grandchildren) that the right to live in Western Palestine is *the essence of the palestinian national consciousness*.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 22, 2008)

editec said:


> Good choice.
> 
> Putting bait in your mouth seems highly unsanitary.
> 
> ...



Oh my I miss spelled a word, I am so sorry


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 22, 2008)

José;725316 said:
			
		

> You sound like a fair-minded western guy who sincerely still believes that someday in the future the palestinian people will drop their demand to live in Western Palestine.




I think the fact that you insist on calling it Western Palestine, when the international community, and the UN all agree it is Israel, and have made it so legally, is all the evidence we need to know where your biases are on this issue.

I on the other hand, am called a Zionist all the time, yet I have never once called the west bank Eastern Israel. The Palestinian people want their own state, they do not want to share a country with the Jews. If you force them to live together, the Palestinians will not all of the sudden decide to get along with the Jews, they will continue to attack them, and eventually drive them all out of the Area. I have a feeling you would love to see that happen.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 22, 2008)

José;725315 said:
			
		

> Have you ever heard Netanyahu fantastic phrase, Delta?
> 
> *The Palestinians say one thing in English and another thing in Arabic.*
> 
> ...



Uh, is that why even the HAMAS spokesman endorsed the plan? 

Hamas would accept Saudi peace plan, spokesman says / Group would stop attacks on Israelis if occupation ends

Hamas' spokesman Ismail Abu Shanab said on the same day that his organisation would accept the initiative:

"That would be satisfactory for all Palestinian military groups to stop and build our state, to be busy in our own affairs, and have good neighborhood with Israelis."

Not exactly known for being western puppets, I'd say. And besides, it was UNANIMOUSLY accepted by all the arab governments. It's their peace plan, the Arab League Peace plan. It recalls the UN Resolutions agreed to by virtually the entire world except obviously Israel and the US. who support the bantustan-type settlements cut up in Israeli walls within Palestine and riddled with checkpoints. I mean, I guess it is admirable that you have so much faith in Israelis to think that they'll give arabs equal rights when all the far-right wing of even this board support the brutality with which they treat Palestine. As for the 'failure of a two-state solution for 60 years', it doesn't make any sense- there ISN'T a two-state status now, there's always been a brutal occupation of Palestine and until that occupation ends peace isn't going to come. If anything's clear is that a one state solution has failed over and over again and that's cristal clear in light of daily human rights abuses against Palestine under the israeli government in Jerusalem.

Ah y gracias, pero la verdad es que mi lengua nativa ES español. Soy costarricense, o 'tico'.


----------



## roomy (Jul 22, 2008)

editec said:


> Good choice.
> 
> Putting bait in your mouth seems highly unsanitary.
> 
> ...


[Q] From Steve Gearhart: Where does the term baited breath come from, as in: I am waiting with baited breath for your answer?

[A] The correct spelling is actually bated breath but its so common these days to see it written as baited breath that theres every chance that it will soon become the usual form, to the disgust of conservative speakers and the confusion of dictionary writers. Examples in newspapers and magazines are legion; this one appeared in the Daily Mirror on 12 April 2003: She hasnt responded yet but Michael is waiting with baited breath.

Its easy to mock, but theres a real problem here. Bated and baited sound the same and we no longer use bated (let alone the verb to bate), outside this one set phrase, which has become an idiom. Confusion is almost inevitable. Bated here is a contraction of abated through loss of the unstressed first vowel (a process called aphesis); it means reduced, lessened, lowered in force. So bated breath refers to a state in which you almost stop breathing as a result of some strong emotion, such as terror or awe.

Shakespeare is the first writer known to use it, in The Merchant of Venice, in which Shylock says to Antonio: Shall I bend low and, in a bondmans key, / With bated breath and whispring humbleness, / Say this .... Nearly three centuries later, Mark Twain employed it in Tom Sawyer: Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale.

For those who know the older spelling or who stop to consider the matter, baited breath evokes an incongruous image; Geoffrey Taylor humorously (and consciously) captured it in verse in his poem Cruel Clever Cat:

Sally, having swallowed cheese,
Directs down holes the scented breeze,
Enticing thus with baited breath
Nice mice to an untimely death. 
[Im indebted to Rainer Thonnes for telling me about this little ditty, which appears in an anthology called Catscript, edited by Marie Angel. However, it was first published in 1933 in a limited edition of Geoffrey Taylors poems entitled A Dash of Garlic.]


----------



## Reality (Jul 23, 2008)

José;725315 said:
			
		

> Have you ever heard Netanyahu fantastic phrase, Delta?
> 
> *The Palestinians say one thing in English and another thing in Arabic.*



Ah Bibi... such a peacemaker

"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
-- Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, former Prime Minister of Israel, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24, 1989.

And that, friends, is what Likhud stands for.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 23, 2008)

Reality said:


> Ah Bibi... such a peacemaker
> 
> "Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
> -- Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, former Prime Minister of Israel, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24, 1989.
> ...


----------



## Reality (Jul 23, 2008)

Epsilon Delta said:


>



There are very very evil people on both sides, not just one.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 23, 2008)

Oh, no doubt, it was just quite a statement he made there.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I think the fact that you insist on calling it Western Palestine, when the international community, and the UN all agree it is Israel, and have made it so legally, is all the evidence we need to know where your biases are on this issue.
> 
> I on the other hand, am called a Zionist all the time, yet I have never once called the west bank Eastern Israel. The Palestinian people want their own state, they do not want to share a country with the Jews. If you force them to live together, the Palestinians will not all of the sudden decide to get along with the Jews, they will continue to attack them, and eventually drive them all out of the Area. I have a feeling you would love to see that happen.



Anyone who has ever lived within a historic dispute knows that there are two names for almost everything, like Derry and Londonderry.   José calls it Western Palestine because it _is_ Western Palestine.   Others call it 'Israel' because the occupiers are well-armed and rich, because they    have a more-than-passable propaganda machine, because AIPAC has US politicians by the short and curly, but most of all because one of the parties to the dispute calls it that.   You have to learn to use both names if you want a settlement.   They call Derry 'stroke city'.    I was born near Caerdydd/Cardiff then moved to Oswestry/Croesoswallt, and that's the way the world works.  On the other hand, the United Nations, the Pope, the Dalai Lama and our cat can all agree together to give someone else's country to foreigners and the blasted locals _still _ won't accept thievery and murder, however much you pay the odd 'responsible element' to grovel, unless you kill them all.  La lutta continua.

Anyone is a Zionist, surely, who supports the present occupation of any Palestinian land by foreigners?   Some of them are raving mad, their madness fuelled by total US support for any evil whatever; others. like you, are merely mildly racist, believing Jews have greater rights than other people without wanting to push that too far.   But the only possible two-state solution will be imposed by the US, the madmen and the 'responsible elements' and be forever unstable.   Do look at Ireland!

The madmen want a greater Israel and the Palestinians want their country back.   Let 'em work out a way to do both in a single (very overpopulated) Country with international guarantees of both people's rights and there'll be some hope.   Anything else means killing forever.


----------



## jillian (Jul 23, 2008)

Rhys said:


> The madmen want a greater Israel and the Palestinians want their country back.   Let 'em work out a way to do both in a single (very overpopulated) Country with international guarantees of both people's rights and there'll be some hope.   Anything else means killing forever.



No. A single state solution means dead jews.

If the Pals can't grow up and accept a two-state solution, I'd say that's THEIR problem and at some point they'll lose.

Pals have no more right to Israel than I do to my ancestral home in Belarus.

And you might want to stay away from stereotypes about rich jews... just saying.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Anyone who has ever lived within a historic dispute knows that there are two names for almost everything, like Derry and Londonderry.   José calls it Western Palestine because it _is_ Western Palestine.   Others call it 'Israel' because the occupiers are well-armed and rich, because they    have a more-than-passable propaganda machine, because AIPAC has US politicians by the short and curly, but most of all because one of the parties to the dispute calls it that.   You have to learn to use both names if you want a settlement.   They call Derry 'stroke city'.    I was born near Caerdydd/Cardiff then moved to Oswestry/Croesoswallt, and that's the way the world works.  On the other hand, the United Nations, the Pope, the Dalai Lama and our cat can all agree together to give someone else's country to foreigners and the blasted locals _still _ won't accept thievery and murder, however much you pay the odd 'responsible element' to grovel, unless you kill them all.  La lutta continua.
> 
> Anyone is a Zionist, surely, who supports the present occupation of any Palestinian land by foreigners?   Some of them are raving mad, their madness fuelled by total US support for any evil whatever; others. like you, are merely mildly racist, believing Jews have greater rights than other people without wanting to push that too far.   But the only possible two-state solution will be imposed by the US, the madmen and the 'responsible elements' and be forever unstable.   Do look at Ireland!
> 
> The madmen want a greater Israel and the Palestinians want their country back.   Let 'em work out a way to do both in a single (very overpopulated) Country with international guarantees of both people's rights and there'll be some hope.   Anything else means killing forever.



you obviously have NO CLUE on history....

let's give the USA back to the American Indians then!  SHEEEEESH!!!!


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 23, 2008)

Yeah, again, I'd have to disagree from the opposing flank and say a one-state solution means dead Palestinians. It's not gonna work, and all the major palestinian groups (and arab governments, and 99% of the international community) including Hamas and the PA have supported the 1967 borders 2-state solution solution.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 23, 2008)

jillian said:


> No. A single state solution means dead jews.
> 
> If the Pals can't grow up and accept a two-state solution, I'd say that's THEIR problem and at some point they'll lose.
> 
> ...



'If the zionists can't grow up and go away, I'd say it's THEIR problem, and at some time they'll be _driven_ away.

Zionists have no right _whatever_ to the land they have stolen in Palestine, any more than the nazis did to Poland.

And you might as well admit that thieves tend to be richer than those they rob of everything.'

You see, jillian, there is more than one way to see the world, at least out here amongst us ordinary earthlings.   Do try _very hard_ to realise that you can't just go about the World grabbing what you want and murdering those who object _forever_.   People will begin to notice, you know,


----------



## jillian (Jul 23, 2008)

Rhys said:


> 'If the zionists can't grow up and go away, I'd say it's THEIR problem, and at some time they'll be _driven_ away.
> 
> Zionists have no right _whatever_ to the land they have stolen in Palestine, any more than the nazis did to Poland.
> 
> ...



You've got the facts twisted ass backwards. But I can't educate you.

So much for meaningful dialogue.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

jillian said:


> No. A single state solution means dead jews.
> 
> If the Pals can't grow up and accept a two-state solution, I'd say that's THEIR problem and at some point they'll lose.
> 
> ...




as if a TWO STATE SOLUTION DOESNT MEAN THE SAME GODDAMN THING...


If the jews can't have their own ethnically pure nation that is THEIR problem.  They can join the fucking Aryians over in the corner weeping about the whole Master (chosen) race schtick.


funny that you admonish anyone for generalizing jews though, jill.  You dont bat an eye suggesting that pals all want to kill jews like werewolves under a full moon but let someone assume anything about a jew and you go strait into Scarlet A mode.


priceless.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> you obviously have NO CLUE on history....
> 
> let's give the USA back to the American Indians then!  SHEEEEESH!!!!



The Am Indians are the EXACT example that shows exactly the problem with rationalized ethnic expansion.. Then again, i am absolutely certain that your kind wont have the slightest tear to shed for the extinction of pals similar to what we saw when OUR natives refused to back down...  But hey, wounded knee was just another example of terrorism, im sure.


----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> And, EDITIC, im not letting you off the hook, buddy. I'll repost the quotes even if you dont respond. You wanna play peacemaker? You wanna bridge a gap? You can't run away from the exact reflecting that your opinion here has with the LAST bunch of racist fiends who insisted that cultural segregation "is only natural".


 
So calling for a realistic and just solution to the conflict in Isreal, and asking people to tone down their ad hominen attacks on each other makes me a racist?




> Indeed, go ask William Joyce if he agrees with you. What do you think his answer will be.


 
I haven't a clue. Why don't you ask him?

I can only tell you what I believe, and I try to address people's posts as I find them.

I seriously doubt you can speak for me, or my opinions, better than I can, though.

The hook you think you've got me on exists entirely in your mind, chum


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Anyone who has ever lived within a historic dispute knows that there are two names for almost everything, like Derry and Londonderry.   José calls it Western Palestine because it _is_ Western Palestine.   Others call it 'Israel' because the occupiers are well-armed and rich, because they    have a more-than-passable propaganda machine, because AIPAC has US politicians by the short and curly, but most of all because one of the parties to the dispute calls it that.   You have to learn to use both names if you want a settlement.   They call Derry 'stroke city'.    I was born near Caerdydd/Cardiff then moved to Oswestry/Croesoswallt, and that's the way the world works.  On the other hand, the United Nations, the Pope, the Dalai Lama and our cat can all agree together to give someone else's country to foreigners and the blasted locals _still _ won't accept thievery and murder, however much you pay the odd 'responsible element' to grovel, unless you kill them all.  La lutta continua.
> 
> Anyone is a Zionist, surely, who supports the present occupation of any Palestinian land by foreigners?   Some of them are raving mad, their madness fuelled by total US support for any evil whatever; others. like you, are merely mildly racist, believing Jews have greater rights than other people without wanting to push that too far.   But the only possible two-state solution will be imposed by the US, the madmen and the 'responsible elements' and be forever unstable.   Do look at Ireland!
> 
> The madmen want a greater Israel and the Palestinians want their country back.   Let 'em work out a way to do both in a single (very overpopulated) Country with international guarantees of both people's rights and there'll be some hope.   Anything else means killing forever.




LOL, to rich.

Look bud people call it Israel because the United nations made it legally so. Your views on the subject are totally one sided and silly if you ask me, but as Jillian said, You can not be educated on the subject so why try.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Epsilon Delta said:


> Yeah, again, I'd have to disagree from the opposing flank and say a one-state solution means dead Palestinians. It's not gonna work, and all the major palestinian groups (and arab governments, and 99% of the international community) including Hamas and the PA have supported the 1967 borders 2-state solution solution.



Black Panthers also wanted segregated black communities.  so what.  What does that have to do with the REST of the blacks who may not fall into that easy shopping cart?  Fuck them, right?  THEY don't matter since picking a convenient representation that fits your desire for segregation facilitates a racist two state solution?


good job.


Read any good STROM THURMAN QUOTES LATELY?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

jillian said:


> You've got the facts twisted ass backwards. But I can't educate you.
> 
> So much for meaningful dialogue.



yea yea yea.,.,. white people said the same thing about those shifty eyed ******* eating watermelon on the chicken farm too..   Governor Wallace can't educate you, Jill.. 


So much for rationalizing racist segregation.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

editec said:


> So calling for a realistic and just solution to the conflict in Isreal, and asking people to tone down their ad hominen attacks on each other makes me a racist?
> 
> I haven't a clue. Why don't you ask him?
> I can only tell you what I believe, and I try to address people's posts as I find them.
> ...





"realizitc" was the same bullshit excuse Wallace and Thurman tried to use to keep segregation around.  This is why you avoid those quotes like the fucking devil himself.  THAT is what makes you a racist.  Trying to facilitate some "natural" seperation that makes William Joyce's third leg stand erect is what makes you a racist.  For real...  Go dive into his latest thread about UNAVOIDABLE BLACK CRIME and trade the words black for pali and crime for terrorism and see if you don't all of a sudden fall in line with his logic.

I don't imagine that I would speak for you, dude.  Your posts do that already.

And, given your quickness to run like a roadrunner from Strom Thurman quotes i'd say your bravado is paper thin.


----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> "realizitc" was the same bullshit excuse Wallace and Thurman tried to use to keep segregation around. This is why you avoid those quotes like the fucking devil himself. THAT is what makes you a racist. Trying to facilitate some "natural" seperation that makes William Joyce's third leg stand erect is what makes you a racist. For real... Go dive into his latest thread about UNAVOIDABLE BLACK CRIME and trade the words black for pali and crime for terrorism and see if you don't all of a sudden fall in line with his logic.
> 
> I don't imagine that I would speak for you, dude. Your posts do that already.
> 
> And, given your quickness to run like a roadrunner from Strom Thurman quotes i'd say your bravado is paper thin.


 
Read this _closely_, Shogun..

I cannot respond to every post here. 

I have made_ my_ positions on this complex issue as clearly as I can.

Accusing me of being a racist because I do not repond to every post YOU object to is silly to the extreme.

Faulting me for what _I write?_ Perfectly reasonable.

Faulting me for what I _do NOT write_ or will not respond to, probably because I think it is_ pointless_ to respond to it? Completely assinine.

There is crap written by Jew-haters on this board that is so over the top that responding to it only gives it and them credibility it and they do not deserve.

In fact, responding to SOME of the trollish nonsense posted here only rewards their trollish nonsense.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Indeed, you make the same argument, once again, that white people in the south made during the civil rights era.  Avoid the realization of the similarity of your position to strom's if you wanna..  but thats just a copout.  Do you also rationalize SOUTH AFRICA's excuses for aparthied with the "but blacks are the majority here" excuse too or does that all of a sudden become a statement you refuse to acknowledge?  I've quoted you making the same excuse for a two state solution.  Call it antisemitic if you need to.  Your own posts are exactly why it's easy to lampoon your position.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Black Panthers also wanted segregated black communities.  so what.  What does that have to do with the REST of the blacks who may not fall into that easy shopping cart?  Fuck them, right?  THEY don't matter since picking a convenient representation that fits your desire for segregation facilitates a racist two state solution?
> 
> 
> good job.
> ...



So now the Black Panther Party is on the same footing as Strom Thurman? Look, man, if there had been a serious proposal by the political leadership of the black community and supported by the majority of blacks to separate from the US entirely and become it's own independent state in order to escape the abusive racism and brutality of Southern White America, I would've been right there with them too. Similarly, until Israel commits itself to removing the walls inside Palestine, release the Palestinians from the oppressive checkpoint regime, cease land-grabs and home demolitions, and in general committing war crimes against the Palestinians I see absolutely no reason to expect palestinians to suck it up in the name of 'Multiculturalism'. This analogy you keep pushing comparing it to the situation in the South has absolutely 0 basis in fact. With that reasoning then the Czech Republic and Slovakia are both racist states, East Timor is a racist state, and all the former Soviet Republics are racist states, Ireland is a racist state, etc.The case in Palestine-Israel is different than that in the US. In one instance the oppressors stole the oppresed as property, totally uprooted them from their homeland, destroyed their culture, erased any memory of it, and treated them like property for hundreds of years, effectively making them inseparable from the country that oppressed them. In the other, the oppressor was an invading force that has taken complete control over a large area and militarily occupies the other, which treats those it occupies, well, unspeakably bad. If the majority of Palestinians and their leadership are in favor of having their own independent state, then go ahead, self determination and democracy, like the West has always preached.


----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Indeed, you make the same argument, once again, that white people in the south made during the civil rights era.


 
What are you talking about?

If you're going to fault me for what I posted, please be kind enough to quote the posts I've written that support your charge.




> Avoid the realization of the similarity of your position to strom's if you wanna.. but thats just a copout.


 
Who is Strom?



> Do you also rationalize SOUTH AFRICA's excuses for aparthied with the "but blacks are the majority here" excuse too or does that all of a sudden become a statement you refuse to acknowledge?


 
You're confusing "rationalizing", for "describing", I think.

I can describe what I believe is the mindset of the NAZIs without rationalizing it. I can proabably describe the mindset of a whole host of people or organziations without rationalizing those people or their positions.  

What motivated Ghanges Khan?  Does describing his motivations necessarily  mean I am a fan of his?




> I've quoted you making the same excuse for a two state solution.


 
Yes, I see now that is exactly what you are doing. 




> Call it antisemitic if you need to. Your own posts are exactly why it's easy to lampoon your position.


 
I haven't called you an anti-semite. Again, imagining that you know what I think, while at the same time ignoring what I have said is goofy. 

I AM telling you that you are a very confused person.

I am not having much the same kind of problem with you, now, that I have had with Jillian. She ALSO decided that she knew me by what I did NOT say.

Since I can describe what I think is motivating one side or the other to take their positions, I must therefore SUPPORT those mindsets.

Apparently, you cannot differentiate my positions, which I think I've described in some detail, from my posts where I might be responding to some other point. Read me in CONTEXT, amigo, and stop leaping to conclusions.

YOu need to calm down, and stop thinking that every time someone doesn't come down on something _you object to_, that they must therefore _be supporting that thing_ you object to.

In fact a LOT of people (regardless of their positions) have to calm down if we want to have an _intelligent discussion_ of this issue.

In order to find a solution, the first thing one must do is understand what the other person is saying, AND what is motivating them.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> LOL, to rich.
> 
> Look bud people call it Israel because the United nations made it legally so. Your views on the subject are totally one sided and silly if you ask me, but as Jillian said, You can not be educated on the subject so why try.



If the UN is God, why don't the zionists obey its resolutions?   As to educating me, no, don't bother, since you have no arguments to offer.   I am quite educated already.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> The Am Indians are the EXACT example that shows exactly the problem with rationalized ethnic expansion.. Then again, i am absolutely certain that your kind wont have the slightest tear to shed for the extinction of pals similar to what we saw when OUR natives refused to back down...  But hey, wounded knee was just another example of terrorism, im sure.


YEP ole wise one, and because of it, you can mouth off as you do right now on this message board....hmmmmm, maybe we should just give it all back to the indians....let them take the riches we have developed over the last few centuries, all because they lost the battle a few hundred years ago.....they deserve ALL that our country has grown in to, right shogie?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

"The same footing" ?


WHAT DOMINATED population is EVER on "the same footing"?  Name ONE.  I dare you.  There WERE a population of blacks during the civil rights era that WANTED their own segregation from whites just as the dominant white WANTED segregation from blacks.  Does this validate American Segregation?  Not in my mind.  If YOU can rationlize segregation in israel then why can't you do the same for Ole Strom and Wallace's opinion?  You can't without insisting that, somehow, israel is "apples to oranges" to every other historic example of a dominant minority population making excuses for segregation.  Point in case: South Africa.  We didn't listen to that shit after Nelson Mandela, an admitted guerilla terrorist, was helped to end a racist state system that prefered whites over blacks for the sake of "keeping the peace".  If you can't apply the same standard to isreal then your logic falls on its face.  Again, IM the one posting quotes from white southerners making the same case for preserving WHITE America as my opposition here makes for keeping a JEWISH israel.  Insisting that there is no comparison by accusation of antisemitism is laughable.  In this case, we are truly repeating a history lesson that we refuse to learn.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 23, 2008)

Epsilon Delta said:


> If the majority of Palestinians and their leadership are in favor of having their own independent state, then go ahead, self determination and democracy, like the West has always preached.



The problem is, it ALL belongs to them.   If a gangster steals your house, would you be content to be allowed an attic?   A single state is very imperfect, but it avoids this problem.   You and the gangster live together, each of you has fixed rights, and eventually all get used to it.   History is full of examples.   Why would anyone be satisfied with a dry patch in his own garden?


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> LOL, to rich.
> 
> Look bud people call it Israel because the United nations made it legally so. Your views on the subject are totally one sided and silly if you ask me, but as Jillian said, You can not be educated on the subject so why try.


I think it was the League of Nations which then became the UN later on, no?

either way, your point is spot on....

Care


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Rhys said:


> The problem is, it ALL belongs to them.   If a gangster steals your house, would you be content to be allowed an attic?   A single state is very imperfect, but it avoids this problem.   You and the gangster live together, and eventually all get used to it.   History is full of examples.   Why would anyone be satisfied with a dry patch in his own garden?



no ne stole their house....the Palestinians had a choice to get their own state at the same time the league of nations made israel, but they CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT IT....

learn a little bit about history kiddo....then they lost other land after that thru WARRING....the arabs attacked israel in the 6 day war...and lost their butts...


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

What if the Pals became Jews, would they get full citizenship or would their children?


----------



## Reality (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> YEP ole wise one, and because of it, you can mouth off as you do right now on this message board....hmmmmm, maybe we should just give it all back to the indians....let them take the riches we have developed over the last few centuries, all because they lost the battle a few hundred years ago.....they deserve ALL that our country has grown in to, right shogie?



1492 and 1948 have the same meaning?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

*What are you talking about?
 If you're going to fault me for what I posted, please be kind enough to quote the posts I've written that support your charge.*

I can do just that.  I quoted you when you made the statements but you, uh, chose to pretend to be Pavlov or something.  Im sure you will avoid this quote as well.

lemme dig it up.



*Who is Strom?*

The white people of the South are the greatest minority in this nation. They deserve consideration and understanding instead of the persecution of twisted propaganda.
Strom Thurmond 

I wanna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that there's not enough troops in the army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the nigra race into our theaters, into our swimming pools, into our homes, and into our churches.
Strom Thurman

Thurmond supported racial segregation with the longest filibuster ever conducted by a single Senator, speaking for 24 hours and 18 minutes in an unsuccessful attempt to derail the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Other Southern Senators, who had agreed as part of a compromise not to filibuster this bill, were upset with Thurmond because they thought his defiance made them look bad to their constituents.[5]

Strom Thurmond - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


*
You're confusing "rationalizing", for "describing", I think.

I can describe what I believe is the mindset of the NAZIs without rationalizing it. I can proabably describe the mindset of a whole host of people or organziations without rationalizing those people or their positions.  

What motivated Ghanges Khan?  Does describing his motivations necessarily  mean I am a fan of his?*

You are dancing around the nomenclature.  Racists can DESCRIBE the necessity for segregation too when faces with the charge of RATIONALIZING racism.

by insisting that a single state solution would eradicate a jewish majority in israel because there are a majoirty of pals you are not DESCRIBING the situation at all outside of RATIONALIZING racism.


*

Yes, I see now that is exactly what you are doing. 
*

I did originally but you chose to avoid my post.  But, dont worry, ill dig it up.  Im BIG on evidence around here.


*
I haven't called you an anti-semite. Again, imagining that you know what I think, while at the same time ignoring what I have said is goofy. *

quote is on the way, homey.

*
I AM telling you that you are a very confused person.*

and, you are a racist.  see, we can both sling mud.


*
I am not having much the same kind of problem with you, now, that I have had with Jillian. She ALSO decided that she knew me by what I did NOT say.*

Again, uno memento.. quote is coming.. lemme dig it up.


*
Since I can describe what I think is motivating one side or the other to take their positions, I must therefore SUPPORT those mindsets.*

Hey, so could GOVERNOR WALLACE!

*
Apparently, you cannot differentiate my positions, which I think I've described in some detail, from my posts where I might be responding to some other point. Read me in CONTEXT, amigo, and stop leaping to conclusions.*

HA!  context my ass.  There really is only one way to read your excuses for a two state solution.

*
YOu need to calm down, and stop thinking that every time someone doesn't come down on something you object to, that they must therefore be supporting that thing you object to.*

Your own words make your bed, homey.. uno momento, por favore

*

In fact a LOT of people (regardless of their positions) have to calm down if we want to have an intelligent discussion of this issue.*

yea, meanwhile ratonalized racism plays out much in the same way it took 100 fucking years after the Emancipation Proclamation to actually apply..

*

In order to find a solution, the first thing one must do is understand what the other person is saying, AND what is motivating them.*


Indeed.  and im pretty sure i've got you under my thumb.. 

one moment, please.


----------



## Reality (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> the arabs attacked israel in the 6 day war...and lost their butts...




Israel launched a "pre-emptive strike" on the Egyptian air force. That is an attack. Prior to that, Israel's southern port had been blockaded, which is an act of war, but not being "attacked." But do lecture on about how other people don't know history.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Again, it isn't a racial thing...both groups have the same "racial" roots, for crying out loud. And any country is free to have a state religion if they so choose. I personally think the my Santa Claus is better than your Santa Claus rational is ridiculous, but it isn't my place to decide if another country can or cannot have a state religion.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Reality said:


> Israel launched a "pre-emptive strike" on the Egyptian air force. That is an attack. Prior to that, Israel's southern port had been blockaded, which is an act of war, but not being "attacked." But do lecture on about how other people don't know history.



YES it was an ACT OF WAR on Egypt's part, thus an attack on the country of Israel, and yes, Israel did fire on the Egyptions for this ACT OF WAR on to them....

FUNNY you neglected to include on your description of bocking the straits that Egypt also *amassed 100,000 troops on their border with  1000 tanks and the likes along with shutting off the canal....*

oh so smart one!  



> In May 1967, Egypt expelled the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) from the Sinai Peninsula, which had been stationed there since 1957 (following the 1956 Sinai invasion to allow for a free Suez Canal) to provide a peace-keeping buffer zone. In reaction to Israeli-Syrian tensions, Egypt amassed 1000 tanks and 100,000 soldiers on the border, closed the Straits of Tiran to all ships flying Israeli flags or carrying strategic materials, and called for unified Arab action against Israel.[5] In response, on June 5, 1967, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack[6] against Egypt's airforce. Jordan, which had signed a mutual defence treaty with Egypt on May 30, then attacked western Jerusalem and Netanya.[7][8][9] At the war's end, Israel had gained control of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. The results of the war affect the geopolitics of the region to this day.



just love you jewish haters that ALWAYS CONVENIENTLY leave out all the facts to make the Palestinians as the innocent victim in this mess....sheesh...

And the Palestinians turning down the region mapped out for them at the same time the League OF Nations mapped out Israel and them turning this down, you chose to not comment on, i see.....?

care


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Editic quotes:




editec said:


> Because they don't PRETEND to be anything but a culturally ethnocentric state, perhaps?
> *I don't blame the Isrealis for wanting their nation to be culturally dominated by Jews.*
> *That's why I am sympathetic to the complaint that the single state solution is unworkable.*
> 
> ...








editec said:


> When people call for a one state solution, *one of the elements of that solution is the elimination of the vexations which are pissing off the displaced, disenfranchised, and ripped-off Palestinians.*
> 
> *The presumption (one that I don't necessarily agree with, incidently) is that when these noxioux elements of the current situation are no longer plaguing the majority of Palestinians, they're not likely to support terror against the Israelis.*
> 
> ...







editec said:


> But I can.
> 
> One doesn't have to be racist to want to live in a nation which is dominated by a particular ethnic value system.
> 
> ...






editec said:


> The real problem is not the absence of reasonable plans but the total lack of political will on the part of the international community.
> 
> Some things are just worth repeating.
> 
> ...






editec said:


> The real problem is not the absence of reasonable plans but the total lack of political will on the part of the international community.
> 
> Some things are just worth repeating.
> 
> ...






editec said:


> I can sign on to that, too.
> 
> A single state would be a great idea if the Jews and Palestinains didn't hate one another.
> 
> ...






*Here are those quotes you didn't want to respond to.. See if you comprehend how similar they are to YOUR arguements..*



*
Segregation in the South is honest, open and aboveboard. Of the two systems, or styles of segregation, the Northern and the Southern, there is no doubt whatever in my mind which is the better.*
Strom Thurmond

*
Segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever!*
George C. Wallace

*I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.*
George C. Wallace

*
We do not show the Negro how to overcome segregation, but we teach him how to accept it as final and just.*
Carter G. Woodson

*
And thus goes segregation which is the most far-reaching development in the history of the Negro since the enslavement of the race.*
Carter G. Woodson


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> "The same footing" ?
> 
> 
> WHAT DOMINATED population is EVER on "the same footing"?  Name ONE.  I dare you.  There WERE a population of blacks during the civil rights era that WANTED their own segregation from whites just as the dominant white WANTED segregation from blacks.  Does this validate American Segregation?  Not in my mind.  If YOU can rationlize segregation in israel then why can't you do the same for Ole Strom and Wallace's opinion?  You can't without insisting that, somehow, israel is "apples to oranges" to every other historic example of a dominant minority population making excuses for segregation.  Point in case: South Africa.  We didn't listen to that shit after Nelson Mandela, an admitted guerilla terrorist, was helped to end a racist state system that prefered whites over blacks for the sake of "keeping the peace".  If you can't apply the same standard to isreal then your logic falls on its face.  Again, IM the one posting quotes from white southerners making the same case for preserving WHITE America as my opposition here makes for keeping a JEWISH israel.  Insisting that there is no comparison by accusation of antisemitism is laughable.  In this case, we are truly repeating a history lesson that we refuse to learn.



FUCK, dude. What the hell? 

I said "equal footing" because YOU were implying that what I was saying was what the Black Panthers were saying, and THEN you tell me to look up Strom Thurmon quotes. That didn't make any sense to me, you were comparing me to both things, HENCE the *question mark*. I felt it was being very obvious. What the hell kind of question is that, anyway? Where did I state that they were on the same footing? Do you have some sort of reading comprehension problem? Do you not understand that I am totally against the racist occupation of Palestine? THERE'S A REASON WHY I KEEP CALLING IT A RACIST OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE. BECAUSE I DON'T AGREE WITH IT. 

Again, ignoring what I said completely, there is a difference between the segregationists in America who wanted to keep a system of blacks as second-class, servile citizens within the same country, and a population that wants ITS OWN COUNTRY. Segregation is what is happening in Israel NOW because the ISRAELI GOVERNMENT is SEGREGATING the population, with Palestinians as second-class citizens. You obviously think that that's wrong, and so do I, and so I advocate for an INDEPENDENT palestine, not a racist segregationalist state like the current one. If you can't understand the simple difference between segregation and independence then the argument is obviously NEVER going to get through to you. So I ask you again, *are the East Timorese RACISTS for claiming independence from Indonesia? Is the entire African continent RACIST for claiming independence from their European colonial overlords? I'm sure you'd agree that ALL former Yugoslav republics are undeniably racist for separating from Serbia.* Yes, obviously all of these are racists. How dare those East Timorese be so racist as to declare Independence from Indonesia, after indonesia had done so much for them, like obliterating a third of their population. Those silly Timorese should've known better and stayed, but NO, they had to be racist segregationalists. Is that what you're saying? 

The enormous difference between the South African bantustans and a 1967 Palestine is that 1967 Palestine is SUPPORTED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE PALESTINIAN POPULATION. You say "Well some blacks supported segregation too!", I'm not talking about some Palestinians, I'm talking about the MAJORITY of Palestinians who favour a 2 State solution, not just 'some palestinians'. Why is that different from Strom Thurmond? That Strom Thurmond was part of the oppressors while the Palestinians are the oppressed. If the independence agreed is based on the terms established by the OPPRESSED, then who the hell am I to say that I know better? "I KNOW BETTER, WHAT YOU REALLY WANT IS TO LIVE WITH THE ISRAELIS!" Why don't you go over there and tell the majority of Palestinians (who support the two-state 1967 solution) that? _That they're all a bunch of racists for wanting an independent state, and obviously you know way better than they do._ [/sarcasm]


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Again, it isn't a racial thing...both groups have the same "racial" roots, for crying out loud. And any country is free to have a state religion if they so choose. I personally think the my Santa Claus is better than your Santa Claus rational is ridiculous, but it isn't my place to decide if another country can or cannot have a state religion.



What is the state religion of the US, ravi?  Better yet, what is the ETHNIC CRITERIA installed to facilite the purity of those whose citizenship is based on that faith?

Law of Return - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Purpose

The purpose of the Law of Return, like that of the Zionist Movement, was to provide a solution to the Jewish people's problem--to re-establish a home for the entire Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel. In the Law of Return, the State of Israel put into practice the Zionist Movement's "credo" as pledged in Israel's Declaration of Independence and recognized by the League of Nations in 1922, when charging Britain with the duty of establishing a Jewish National Home, and by the United Nations within the Partition Plan of 1947 which provided for establishment of Israel as an independent Jewish state.

Eligibility requirements

Those who are eligible to immigrate under the Law of Return are immediately granted citizenship. Controversy has arisen as to whether all those claiming citizenship rights under the Law of Return should be registered as "Jewish" citizens for census purposes. Jewish status is traditionally granted according to the halakhic definition of being Jewish-- if your mother is Jewish, you are Jewish as well or if you convert to Judaism (though conversions to Reform and Conservative Judaism streams are generally not recognized by many people in Israel). However, any Jew regardless of affiliation may return and claim citizenship in Israel.

Originally, the Law of Return was restricted to Jews only. A 1970 amendment, however, stated that, "The rights of a Jew under this Law and the rights of an oleh under the Nationality Law...are also vested in a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew" (Law of Return).

The demographic explanation

A second explanation is that in order to increase immigration levels so as to offset the "demographic threat" posed by the continuing presence and growth of the Palestinian population, the law expanded the base group of those eligible to immigrate to Israel.[2]

Controversy

Critics claim that the Law of Return runs counter to the claims of a democratic state.[8][9] [10]

Critique of the Law of Return by Palestinians and advocates for Palestinian refugees is often linked to the Palestinian demand for a right of return.[11] The Law of Return, as contrasted against the right of return, is cited by Palestinians and their supporters as a deep offense that amounts to asking them to accept what they see as institutionalized ethnic discrimination that privileges the rights of Jews.[12]


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

I said other countries, Shog. I only have a say in how we run ours. No time to read the rest of your post for now.

And, btw, nothing you quoted Editec saying was racist. You, yourself, want to live in a country with an official language. Think about what that says about your position for a while.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

So if my mother converted to Judiasm then I'm eligible to live in Israel if I also claim to be a Jew.

Where is the racial issue?


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Again, it isn't a racial thing...both groups have the same "racial" roots, for crying out loud. And any country is free to have a state religion if they so choose. I personally think the my Santa Claus is better than your Santa Claus rational is ridiculous, but it isn't my place to decide if another country can or cannot have a state religion.



Imposing a "state religion" is usurping freedom.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> Imposing a "state religion" is usurping freedom.



Not if that is what the population wants and not if it is within the bounds of their constitution.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

There is no population in the world where 100 percent of the people want to be forced to adhere to a state religion, and it is ALWAYS a violation of human and civil rights to require it.

Read your history, girl.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 23, 2008)

Not exactly. It really sort of depends on the case. England's 'official' religion of whatever is Anglicanism, but most it's churches are empty, and everyone is free to worship whatever, but hten you look at Saudi Arabia and that's a totally different story.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

True.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

*FUCK, dude. What the hell? 

I said "equal footing" because YOU were implying that what I was saying was what the Black Panthers were saying, and THEN you tell me to look up Strom Thurmon quotes. 

dude.. backtrack however you need to.  I used YOUR words.


That didn't make any sense to me, you were comparing me to both things, HENCE the question mark. I felt it was being very obvious. What the hell kind of question is that, anyway? Where did I state that they were on the same footing? Do you have some sort of reading comprehension problem? Do you not understand that I am totally against the racist occupation of Palestine? THERE'S A REASON WHY I KEEP CALLING IT A RACIST OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE. BECAUSE I DON'T AGREE WITH IT. 

Reread the post I was responding to.  I'm not interested in hearing about your supposed benevolence while you insist that isreal, somehow, is impervious to the lessons of history when we see one dominant group fucking another in the ass.  OF COURSE THE OCCUPATION IS RACIST.  Do you want a fucking cookie?  Im commenting on your excuses for segregated two state solutions.. which, ironically enough, you go on to rationalize below.



Again, ignoring what I said completely, there is a difference between the segregationists in America who wanted to keep a system of blacks as second-class, servile citizens within the same country, and a population that wants ITS OWN COUNTRY. Segregation is what is happening in Israel NOW because the ISRAELI GOVERNMENT is SEGREGATING the population, with Palestinians as second-class citizens. You obviously think that that's wrong, and so do I, and so I advocate for an INDEPENDENT palestine, not a racist segregationalist state like the current one. 

An independent Palistine that SHARES isreal?  That SHARES the land where isreal wants to build the next temple of solomon?  Yea, dude..  I fully expect israel to let that happen.



If you can't understand the simple difference between segregation and independence then the argument is obviously NEVER going to get through to you. So I ask you again, are the East Timorese RACISTS for claiming independence from Indonesia?

If their citizenship criteria is based on ethnic varibales then yes.  I'll return the question,  What ethnic group has the right to claim eastern europe?  Are you a fan of Milosovic as long as a nation can be carved out for those that were purged?

Kosovo War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Is the entire African continent RACIST for claiming independence from their European colonial overlords? I'm sure you'd agree that ALL former Yugoslav republics are undeniably racist for separating from Serbia. Yes, obviously all of these are racists. How dare those East Timorese be so racist as to declare Independence from Indonesia, after indonesia had done so much for them, like obliterating a third of their population. Those silly Timorese should've known better and stayed, but NO, they had to be racist segregationalists. Is that what you're saying? 


IS SOUTH AFRICA A TWO STATE SOLUTION TO APARTHIED?  WERE THOSE laughable segregated state solutions REALLY convincing ANYONE?  Clearly, you don't mind eastern europe being ethnically purged.  If thats the hand you want to play then so bit it, dude.



The enormous difference between the South African bantustans and a 1967 Palestine is that 1967 Palestine is SUPPORTED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE PALESTINIAN POPULATION. You say "Well some blacks supported segregation too!", I'm not talking about some Palestinians, I'm talking about the MAJORITY of Palestinians who favour a 2 State solution, not just 'some palestinians'. 


post your evidence.  If you think a majority of pals want a two state solution im going to laugh at you.  I posted quite the opposite just the other day and I'll go ahead and dig it up for you.  But, by all means, post what you got.

Support ot opposition to a one-state solution in historic Palestine where Muslims, Christians and Jews have equal rights and responsibilities
 Support 	 528 	 65.5 	 70.4 	 
Oppose 	222 	27.5 	29.6 	
http://www.neareastconsulting.com/surveys/ppp/p22/out_freq_q27.php/


For some Palestinians, one state with Israel is better than none
Frustrated by years of failed peace talks for a two-state solution, some are giving up hope of independence and pushing the idea of a single democratic state with equal rights for all.
For some Palestinians, one state with Israel is better than none - Los Angeles Times



Why is that different from Strom Thurmond? That Strom Thurmond was part of the oppressors while the Palestinians are the oppressed.

again.  i've posted my evidence.  post yours.



 If the independence agreed is based on the terms established by the OPPRESSED, then who the hell am I to say that I know better? "I KNOW BETTER, WHAT YOU REALLY WANT IS TO LIVE WITH THE ISRAELIS!" Why don't you go over there and tell the majority of Palestinians (who support the two-state 1967 solution) that? That they're all a bunch of racists for wanting an independent state, and obviously you know way better than they do. [/sarcasm]


Again, post your evidence.  I've had the gonadular fortitude to post mine when making statements..*


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I said other countries, Shog. I only have a say in how we run ours. No time to read the rest of your post for now.
> 
> And, btw, nothing you quoted Editec saying was racist. You, yourself, want to live in a country with an official language. Think about what that says about your position for a while.



He's rationalizing a two state solution exactly how Thruman did.  I dont expect you to keep up.  


an official language is not an ethnic marginalization, ravi.  How many latino politicians have you ever seen me demonize for the sake of a WHITE majority?  Im unapologetically American but I hold no standard regarding ethnicity.


Perhaps you should learn to swim before you jump in the river.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> So if my mother converted to Judiasm then I'm eligible to live in Israel if I also claim to be a Jew.
> 
> Where is the racial issue?



Why must one prove that their parents were jews if this were merely a religious issue, ravi?   Bouncing back and forth wont make the right of return any less dictated upon ETHNICITY.


need some e-gatorade?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Not if that is what the population wants and not if it is within the bounds of their constitution.



sooo a majority of christians in the US an invalidate the citizenship of muslims and buddhists?


way to keep that brain juice flowing, ravi!


So, by extension, i guess you really dont have a problem with muslim nations keeping women as subclassed citizens, eh?  I mean, it's IN their government.. Its the POPULAR RELIGIOUS AFFILATION.. 


right?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Epsilon Delta said:


> Not exactly. It really sort of depends on the case. England's 'official' religion of whatever is Anglicanism, but most it's churches are empty, and everyone is free to worship whatever, but hten you look at Saudi Arabia and that's a totally different story.



uh, yea.. if we want to totally ignore the previous 500 years of English history...


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> uh, yea.. if we want to totally ignore the previous 500 years of English history...


if you can resort to using 500 years for english past history then why not a few thousand years of israeli history or the past 60 or 100 years?


when is using history ok, and is there a magical cutoff somewhere in your head or reasoning on the past years?

care


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> There is no population in the world where 100 percent of the people want to be forced to adhere to a state religion, and it is ALWAYS a violation of human and civil rights to require it.
> 
> Read your history, girl.


isn't the near entire middle east that way?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> if you can resort to using 500 years for english past history then why not a few thousand years of israeli history or the past 60 or 100 years?
> 
> 
> when is using history ok, and is there a magical cutoff somewhere in your head or reasoning on the past years?
> ...



um, do the english currently prohibit catholics from worshipping freely despite the Anglican church?  further, are the historic dominance of either church currently being used to minimize the equality of the other in regards to THE GOVERNMENT?  Care to make that same statement regarding israel?


Hey, if you can whip out a historic example to validate the SUPERIORITY of any social variable go ahead and whip it out.  I'll enjoy seeing what you think validates the domination of one over the other.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> isn't the near entire middle east that way?



Thank you for making my point.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> um, do the english currently prohibit catholics from worshipping freely despite the Anglican church?  further, are the historic dominance of either church currently being used to minimize the equality of the other in regards to THE GOVERNMENT?  Care to make that same statement regarding israel?
> 
> 
> Hey, if you can whip out a historic example to validate the SUPERIORITY of any social variable go ahead and whip it out.  I'll enjoy seeing what you think validates the domination of one over the other.



arabs living in israel can freely worship their religion, as with christians living there, buddhists, etc....?

so, maybe i'm missing your point?


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

> Just over three quarters, or 75.5%, of the population are Jews from a diversity of Jewish backgrounds. Approximately 68% of Israeli Jews are Israeli-born, 22% are immigrants from Europe and the Americas, and 10% are immigrants from Asia and Africa (including the Arab World).[204] The religious affiliation of Israeli Jews varies widely: 55% say they are "traditional," while 20% consider themselves "secular Jews," 17% define themselves as "Orthodox Jews"; the final 8% define themselves as "Haredi Jews."[205]
> 
> 
> Bahá'í World Centre in HaifaMaking up 16.2% of the population, Muslims constitute Israel's largest religious minority. Israeli Arabs, who comprise 19.8% of the population, contribute significantly to that figure as over four fifths (82.6%) of them are Muslim. Of the remaining Israeli Arabs, 8.8% are Christian and 8.4% are Druze.[206] Members of many other religious groups, including Buddhists and Hindus, maintain a presence in Israel, albeit in small numbers.[207]
> ...


  wiki


----------



## Rhys (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> no ne stole their house....the Palestinians had a choice to get their own state at the same time the league of nations made israel, but they CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT IT....
> 
> learn a little bit about history kiddo....then they lost other land after that thru WARRING....the arabs attacked israel in the 6 day war...and lost their butts...



Your answer, then, is constant war?   Or more probably, I suppose, extermination camps?   Your colonialist chums would hardly get away with _those_ nowadays, you know, which is why they haven't tried.  I think you are a bit of an ass, frankly.   What would you have said to those wicked French, Poles, Yugoslavs and such fighting the victorious Reich?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> arabs living in israel can freely worship their religion, as with christians living there, budhists, etc....?
> 
> so, maybe i'm missing your point?



They have the same chance to become the PM of israel like catholics OR anglicans do in England?


It's about the equal application of gov regardless of differences; religious or ethnic.  Im also not of the mind that America must maintian a christian domination on our gov.  LOTS of people do.  I find examples of muslims in our gov refreshing to the status quo.  This is why I bring up the US at every corner here: Actual western nations governed by Democracy don't apply ethnic standards to equality in order to maintain a chokehold on state power.


So, how quick will WE, the US, restrict latinos blacks asians etc, from our highest positions for the sake of WHITEY?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> There is no population in the world where 100 percent of the people want to be forced to adhere to a state religion, and it is ALWAYS a violation of human and civil rights to require it.
> 
> Read your history, girl.



Really?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> He's rationalizing a two state solution exactly how Thruman did.  I dont expect you to keep up.



With the way your silly mind works? I doubt anyone could.




> an official language is not an ethnic marginalization, ravi.  How many latino politicians have you ever seen me demonize for the sake of a WHITE majority?  Im unapologetically American but I hold no standard regarding ethnicity.


Nope, but it is you wanting your ethnic identity protected.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Rhys said:


> Your answer, then, is constant war?   Or more probably, I suppose, extermination camps?   Your colonialist chums would hardly get away with _those_ nowadays, you know, which is why they haven't tried.  I think you are a bit of an ass, frankly.   What would you have said to those wicked French, Poles, Yugoslavs and such fighting the victorious Reich?


i am not jewish, i am not a zionist.....leave it at that....

I do think on several occaisions that Israel has been harsh, and i am in no way happy with conditions over there, especially with the conditions the good Palestinians have to go thru....

what i don't accept, is that ALL OF THIS is solely Israel's fault....i try to put myself in their shoes along with putting myself in the palestinian's shoes and the whole thing sucks from here to kingdom come....

i don't have a sollution, but i am opened to hear about any of them....because one is certainly needed!

care


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Why must one prove that their parents were jews if this were merely a religious issue, ravi?   Bouncing back and forth wont make the right of return any less dictated upon ETHNICITY.
> 
> 
> need some e-gatorade?


Maybe a Jew can explain it to you. Regardless, the Pals are free to convert, eh?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> sooo a majority of christians in the US an invalidate the citizenship of muslims and buddhists?
> 
> 
> way to keep that brain juice flowing, ravi!
> ...



Damn, I'm trying my best to resist calling you a retard.

Our constitution doesn't allow a state religion.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

*With the way your silly mind works? I doubt anyone could.*


as if this is the first time you've proven to be a lamprey in a tank full of sharks..


*Nope, but it is you wanting your ethnic identity protected.*

quote me.  

You are, once again, showing how much of a fucking liar you are when you hae nothing more to add.  I've NEVER insisted on a WHTIE majority.  A LEGAL population, yes.  But a WHITE majority, nope.  


I challenge you to QUOTE me suggesting anything of the sort.  Or, like I told Jillian when she insisted that I want to see dead jews, Shut the fuck up.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Damn, I'm trying my best to resist calling you a retard.
> 
> Our constitution doesn't allow a state religion.



Of course it doesn't.

Now, can you say the same thing about Israel?  IRAN?  Tell me which you can accept according to your posted standards...

call me whatever you need to.  We both know that, once again, I've handed you your ass.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

Make sure you wash your hands, Shog. You spend a lot of time handing asses out, according to you....ecoli is always a risk you assume when doing that so often.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> They have the same chance to become the PM of israel like catholics OR anglicans do in England?
> 
> 
> It's about the equal application of gov regardless of differences; religious or ethnic.  Im also not of the mind that America must maintian a christian domination on our gov.  LOTS of people do.  I find examples of muslims in our gov refreshing to the status quo.  This is why I bring up the US at every corner here: Actual western nations governed by Democracy don't apply ethnic standards to equality in order to maintain a chokehold on state power.
> ...



are you saying that if an arab citizen of israel ran for office in his community as their representative in their par;iament of sorts, he would not be allowed to hold office even if he were elected by his own community?

We still don't have this "fairness" in our own gvt.....look how many men there are compared to women with women at 50% of the population....

Look at how many Black people are in our Senate?

Look at how many Chinese there are or American Indian there are or yes, even Muslims there are etc....what makes you think that we are really that different shogun?

care


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Not if that is what the population wants and not if it is within the bounds of their constitution.


so true, and the good thing with Israel is that it is a Democracy, and the people can vote it out at anytime, no such thing with the middle eastern countries and others in Asia and western Asia etc...


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> *With the way your silly mind works? I doubt anyone could.*
> 
> 
> as if this is the first time you've proven to be a lamprey in a tank full of sharks..
> ...



So you are now claiming that you are neither for an official language in the US (English) nor for making immigrants learn English to become citizens?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Of course it doesn't.
> 
> Now, can you say the same thing about Israel?  IRAN?  Tell me which you can accept according to your posted standards...
> 
> call me whatever you need to.  We both know that, once again, I've handed you your ass.


Keep dreaming. One day you actually will win one of these internet fights with someone. I suggest you work on 52Street...there you've got a fighting chance.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Of course it doesn't.
> 
> Now, can you say the same thing about Israel?  IRAN?  Tell me which you can accept according to your posted standards...
> 
> call me whatever you need to.  We both know that, once again, I've handed you your ass.


no you haven't, as a Democracy, israel can eliminate their religion anytime they feel like voting to do such, there is no opportunity to do that in Iran...dummy...doesn't mean they will, but they CAN....and that counts for something, don't ya think?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> are you saying that if an arab citizen of israel ran for office in his community as their representative in their par;iament of sorts, he would not be allowed to hold office even if he were elected by his own community?
> 
> We still don't have this "fairness" in our own gvt.....look how many men there are compared to women with women at 50% of the population....
> 
> ...



IM saying that as long as you try and preserve a WHITE MAJORITY, er, JEWISH MAJORITY in israel by marginalizing pals there will never be a MUSLIM PRIME MINISTER. 

Hell, even Hitler had token positions for the loyal jews who played along.  Is that supposed to impress someone?

Indeed, and look and the BLACK MAN who is about to become president a mere 40 years after the civil rights era.  Can you say the same for a muslim in Israel?  Dont give me this "we dont have equality" shit.  You know damn well that America doesn't limit positions based on sex or race.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> so true, and the good thing with Israel is that it is a Democracy, and the people can vote it out at anytime, no such thing with the middle eastern countries and others in Asia and western Asia etc...



Democracy like the one that allowed blacks to be slaves and 3/5s human beings.  Again, According to Ravi's logic, all it takes is popular opinons and a state constituion and those arab nations are justified in their marginalization.  Maybe you can vet that out after you tell me when a muslim will ever be an israeli PM like we are seeing a black man ascend OUR highest office.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> So you are now claiming that you are neither for an official language in the US (English) nor for making immigrants learn English to become citizens?



When did ENGLISH become synonymous with WHITE, ravi?  Does it take a certain pigment to speak the language?  Do Asians speak Chinese strait out of the womb due to the pigment of their skin??


what a fucking joke.  I've nailed you again for making stupid statements, ravi..  You might as well have just insisted that Stormfront posted the video!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Keep dreaming. One day you actually will win one of these internet fights with someone. I suggest you work on 52Street...there you've got a fighting chance.



what a joke.  I send you running to the flame zone almost DAILY.  that is, when you are not trying to accuse someone of posting a STORMFRONT video!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> no you haven't, as a Democracy, israel can eliminate their religion anytime they feel like voting to do such, there is no opportunity to do that in Iran...dummy...doesn't mean they will, but they CAN....and that counts for something, don't ya think?



riiiiiiiiiiight... ISRAEL sure CAN vot to eliminate hebrew influence while Iran CANNOT!


LOLOLOL

no, it doesn't.  You might as well have just said that the SOUTH was still a democracy since they could VOTE out slavery.  


Again, stop avoiding the question:  WHEN DO YOU EXPECT TO SEE A MUSLIM PM OF ISRAEL LIKE WE ARE ABOUT TO SEE A BLACK MAN FOR PRESIDENT?


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> riiiiiiiiiiight... ISRAEL sure CAN vot to eliminate hebrew influence while Iran CANNOT!
> 
> 
> LOLOLOL
> ...



About when we in this country will see a female....  
  what was it, 144 years before women even got to vote in our newly formed country and how old is the state of israel now?*
Care


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Democracy like the one that allowed blacks to be slaves and 3/5s human beings.  Again, According to Ravi's logic, all it takes is popular opinons and a state constituion and those arab nations are justified in their marginalization.  Maybe you can vet that out after you tell me when a muslim will ever be an israeli PM like we are seeing a black man ascend OUR highest office.


tell me when YOU think a Muslim will be president of the united states and i will venture to answer you this on israel!!!!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> About when we in this country will see a female....
> what was it, 144 years before women even got to vote in our newly formed country and how old is the state of israel now?*
> Care



and that almost happend THIS YEAR.  Put up a better female candidate besides Clinton and it will become a quick reality. 


Now, again, WHEN DO YOU PREDICT THE SAME WILL HAPPEN IN ISRAEL FOR A MUSLIM?


dont give me your boohoo hear me roar bullshit.  YOUVE GOT more equality in the US than a muslim has in isreal.  At least a WOMAN has a running chance of winning the seat.  Again, can you say that for a muslim in israel?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> tell me when YOU think a Muslim will be president of the united states and i will venture to answer you this on israel!!!!



Sooner than you think.  And I would have no problem voting for one.

Kieth Ellison is a US congressman.  

Can you find a single equivalent in israel?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> I think it was the League of Nations which then became the UN later on, no?
> 
> either way, your point is spot on....
> 
> Care



The league of Nations gave the Brits a mandate over Palestine. The brits came up with the division plan, Then Later the UN accepted the existence of Israel and made it legal, under international law.


----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2008)

Dear Shogun.

Lad I am terrible sorry if you cannot understand the difference between what I write, and how you choose to interpret it.

Believe me I will not waste my time or yours responding to anyone with the unmitigated gall to imagine that they can read my mind.

Now, run along and bother somebody who wants to play these hate games that amuse you.

Cause, Kiddo, I don't waste my time with people filled with the hateful igornance that you are trying to spew in my direction.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> When did ENGLISH become synonymous with WHITE, ravi?  Does it take a certain pigment to speak the language?  Do Asians speak Chinese strait out of the womb due to the pigment of their skin??
> 
> 
> what a fucking joke.  I've nailed you again for making stupid statements, ravi..  You might as well have just insisted that Stormfront posted the video!



Well, at least you aren't lying about it. And yes, wanting English to be the official language is to preserve cultural heritage. Not that there's anything wrong with that, though I personally think it would be unconstitutional in OUR country.

Hypocrite much?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Well, at least you aren't lying about it. And yes, wanting English to be the official language is to preserve cultural heritage. Not that there's anything wrong with that, though I personally think it would be unconstitutional in OUR country.
> 
> Hypocrite much?



Wow so the constitution says it is not legal to have an official language in the US? Hmm never heard that one before.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Wow so the constitution says it is not legal to have an official language in the US? Hmm never heard that one before.


Freedom of speech. Then there's equal protection.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> The league of Nations gave the Brits a mandate over Palestine. The brits came up with the division plan, Then Later the UN accepted the existence of Israel and made it legal, under international law.


yes, you were right and i was wrong, i meant to come back at you and tell you such earlier, but forgot....my bad!

care


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Well, at least you aren't lying about it. And yes, wanting English to be the official language is to preserve cultural heritage. Not that there's anything wrong with that, though I personally think it would be unconstitutional in OUR country.
> 
> Hypocrite much?



CULTURAL HERITAGE, ravi.  NOT ETHNIC HERITAGE.  


For real.. it's like im watching you peddle along on your little banana seat, training wheel bike from the seat of my harley fucking davidson.

face it.  once again youve said stupid shit that you cant back up.  THIS is why you just cant compete, ravikins.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Freedom of speech. Then there's equal protection.



I do not see how having an official language is automatically taking away peoples freedom of speech. Nobody is saying they can not speak other languages. Just that the US should have an official language of governments for example.

Now if we said they must speak English and only English, that would be a violation of their free speech rights. You are aware that we already have laws that require legal immigrants to have "a basic knowledge of English" All tough we clearly do not enforce them anymore. Legal immigrants used to have to take classes on US History, government, and Basic English.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

editec said:


> Dear Shogun.
> 
> Lad I am terrible sorry if you cannot understand the difference between what I write, and how you choose to interpret it.
> 
> ...




myawwwwwww... whatsa matter widdle guy?  did you think I WOULDNT fucking quote your own posts?  You see, THIS is what sets me apart from the likes of you, jill and ravi.  You make statements that youd like to polish like a turd and then cry and run away when your OWN WORDS come back to haunt you.  Hell, when I make accusations I prove it.  LIKE I DID WITH YOUR QUOTES.  Dont be a fucking baby, dude.  You said it.  STAND BEHIND YOUR MESSAGE, yo.


Calling me names wont make that tail between your legs shake any less than it is right now.  Nor will they alleviate the fact that i've justpunked you out with evidence.


Hey, i bet Ravi and Jill wont care to read your posts given that you just took a page from their playbook and reserted to crybaby shittalking to act like your octopus ink, dude!  Clearly, you are as spineless as an one too!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> CULTURAL HERITAGE, ravi.  NOT ETHNIC HERITAGE.
> 
> 
> For real.. it's like im watching you peddle along on your little banana seat, training wheel bike from the seat of my harley fucking davidson.
> ...



Actually, the ethnic heritage of white Americans is mainly British.  And the ethnic heritage of Jews and Arabs is basically the same. They are cousins. Just like we are cousins to the Brits. 



hahahaha! You want an ethnic majority, you aren't fooling me.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Freedom of speech. Then there's equal protection.



uh, what??  the first amendment doesn't prohibit a national language.

WOW.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Actually, the ethnic heritage of white Americans is mainly British.  And the ethnic heritage of Jews and Arabs is basically the same. They are cousins. Just like we are cousins to the Brits.
> 
> 
> 
> hahahaha! You want an ethnic majority, you aren't fooling me.



Mainly British? Hardly anymore.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I do not see how having an official language is automatically taking away peoples freedom of speech. Nobody is saying they can not speak other languages. Just that the US should have an official language of governments for example.
> 
> Now if we said they must speak English and only English, that would be a violation of their free speech rights. You are aware that we already have laws that require legal immigrants to have "a basic knowledge of English" All tough we clearly do not enforce them anymore. Legal immigrants used to have to take classes on US History, government, and Basic English.


They still do. I have a Scottish friend that just became a citizen and he showed me some of the stuff he had to know...some of it I didn't. 

The problem with having a government that has an official language, if enforced, is you are denying current citizens equal protection in court and voting rights, and I'm sure a few others.

My state has had an official language for years and it hasn't stopped the spending on government materials in English and Haitian. 

IMO, it's nothing but xenophobia.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

I have to say I'm honored to be lumped in with Editec and Jillian, both who make me feel like I know absolutely nothing about anything.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Mainly British? Hardly anymore.


No, then what?


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

That's just their way of making themselves feel smarter, Ravi. You're every bit as knowledgeable on any subject. And when you aren't, you don't just make things up. Well, not intentionally or maliciously, at any rate......sort of inadvertently and good humoredly........


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Actually, the ethnic heritage of white Americans is mainly British.  And the ethnic heritage of Jews and Arabs is basically the same. They are cousins. Just like we are cousins to the Brits.
> 
> 
> 
> hahahaha! You want an ethnic majority, you aren't fooling me.



uh, yea.. there sure is not giant GERMAN population here in the midwest.  Town names like HERMAN with their, apparently english oktoberfest, is just a fucking myth.  Not to mention asians and blacks and every other ethnicity that SHARES our AMERICAN heritage.  holy fuck you are one stupid kid, Rav.  It's called a melting post because it sounds good!

Again, prove your accusation like I did with Edetic above.  given all the other stupid shit you think is true it doesn't bother me that youd have to ASSume as much and it doesn't shock me that you can't support it.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> They still do. I have a Scottish friend that just became a citizen and he showed me some of the stuff he had to know...some of it I didn't.
> 
> The problem with having a government that has an official language, if enforced, is you are denying current citizens equal protection in court and voting rights, and I'm sure a few others.
> 
> ...



So then, how would you have it, if say a man who only speaks Dutch is elected to congress, should all the congressmen have to learn Dutch to be able to speak to him, or should he have to learn English? Or are we going to pay for translators? 

Besides why should a man who ignored our laws about learning Basic English to become a us citizen, be allowed in congress in the first place?


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

Miller.....
Hungarian reporting for duty, sir.
Also Scots, Irish, English, allegedly Indian and heavens knows what else.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I have to say I'm honored to be lumped in with Editec and Jillian, both who make me feel like I know absolutely nothing about anything.



im sure you do.  Ignorance is bliss, i hear.  Given Edetic's reactio to having his own quotes spat in his face, id say you picked a winner!

Indeed, HE reacts about like you do when having the eballs to challenge someone to quote him wheras when challenged....


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> That's just their way of making themselves feel smarter, Ravi. You're every bit as knowledgeable on any subject. And when you aren't, you don't just make things up. Well, not intentionally or maliciously, at any rate......sort of inadvertently and good humoredly........



Oh, I don't mean they do it purposely. I just mean they _are smarter_ than I am.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> That's just their way of making themselves feel smarter, Ravi. You're every bit as knowledgeable on any subject. And when you aren't, you don't just make things up. Well, not intentionally or maliciously, at any rate......sort of inadvertently and good humoredly........



what a load of SHIT.


JUST as knowledgeable?  I can name half a dozen subjects where her mind numbingly ignorance has been proven with links abound.


starting with employment law and ENDING with her support of racist government standards in israel.

sheesh..  


oh.. I didn't catch the SARCASM...


I hope.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> So then, how would you have it, if say a man who only speaks Dutch is elected to congress, should all the congressmen have to learn Dutch to be able to speak to him, or should he have to learn English? Or are we going to pay for translators?
> 
> Besides why should a man who ignored our laws about learning Basic English to become a us citizen, be allowed in congress in the first place?


Who would vote for him? How would he argue on the Senate floor...I honestly don't see this happening, Charles. I can't imagine a populace stupid enough to send someone to Congress that can't communicate (well, maybe Texans)...what you are talking about has nothing to do with equal protection.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Who would vote for him? How would he argue on the Senate floor...I honestly don't see this happening, Charles. I can't imagine a populace stupid enough to send someone to Congress that can't communicate (well, maybe Texans)...what you are talking about has nothing to do with equal protection.



So let me be sure I know where you stand. You think the current laws requiring Immigrants to learn English are unconstitutional? or do you think we should just ignore them? Because if you do not think those things, then I do not see why we are even having the debate. The law is the law and they should learn basic English. Both legal and illegal, when we eventually make them legal.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

the population of illegal dutch would vote for him.  he would argue in span, er dutch, and let anyone else press 1 for engrish.  Use an actual example.  It's only a matter of time before span, er dutch breaks up the common language on this nation.  THAT is not racism any more than germans wanting their gov to abide by the german language.  Don't let that keep you from insisting as much though.  You are clearly not one to make unfounded accusations in the face of personal blistering ignorance.


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Oh, I don't mean they do it purposely. I just mean they _are smarter_ than I am.



You think that, but I'm telling you, it ain't so.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> So let me be sure I know where you stand. You think the current laws requiring Immigrants to learn English are unconstitutional? or do you think we should just ignore them? Because if you do not think those things, then I do not see why we are even having the debate. The law is the law and they should learn basic English. Both legal and illegal, when we eventually make them legal.



I think it is much ado about nothing. The children always learn English. And even if we all suddenly woke up speaking fluent spanish, we'd still be Americans.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I think it is much ado about nothing. The children always learn English. And even if we all suddenly woke up speaking fluent spanish, we'd still be Americans.



They do eh, what about all this hub bub about dual language education then?


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> No, then what?



german is number one, i believe?  from the eu


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> the population of illegal dutch would vote for him.  he would argue in span, er dutch, and let anyone else press 1 for engrish.  Use an actual example.  It's only a matter of time before span, er dutch breaks up the common language on this nation.  THAT is not racism any more than germans wanting their gov to abide by the german language.  Don't let that keep you from insisting as much though.  You are clearly not one to make unfounded accusations in the face of personal blistering ignorance.



You know what? If some state wanted to elect a person that spoke only pig latin, they'd be within their rights to do so. Stupid, but still within their rights. 

It isn't racism. No more than what's between the Israelis and the Pals is racism. But you can't see that because you still think Israelis and Pals are different races. They both want what you want, a continuance of culture.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> They do eh, what about all this hub bub about dual language education then?


I don't know. I think public school should be taught in English. I also think it should be mandatory for every child to learn another language, just like it's mandatory for them to learn math.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> You know what? If some state wanted to elect a person that spoke only pig latin, they'd be within their rights to do so. Stupid, but still within their rights.



No, they would be electing someone who is in violation of our immigration laws, if he could not speak basic English 

They would be well within their rights to tell him (in pig Latin of course) that if he wanted to be able to communicate with his fellow congress people, he better learn English


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> german is number one, i believe?  from the eu



Really? There are more descendants of Germans in the US than descendants of Brits? I did not know that.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> No, they would be electing someone who is in violation of our immigration laws, if he could not speak basic English
> 
> They would be well within their rights to tell him (in pig Latin of course) that if he wanted to be able to communicate with his fellow congress people, he better learn English



If he was born here and only spoke pig latin, there would be no violation of immigration laws. And yes, they'd be within their rights to not vote for him.

Bleh, this conversation is going down the toilet.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> You know what? If some state wanted to elect a person that spoke only pig latin, they'd be within their rights to do so. Stupid, but still within their rights.
> 
> It isn't racism. No more than what's between the Israelis and the Pals is racism. But you can't see that because you still think Israelis and Pals are different races. They both want what you want, a continuance of culture.




HA!

yea.. whatever, yo.  pals and jews are different ethnicities.  Dont believe me?  Ask a jew if they are the the same as an arab.  And sure, a state could elect a pig latin speaker.. BUT THAT PERSON WOULD AHVE TO CONDUCT STATE BUSINESS IN ENGLISH.  


make any excuse you want for your racism, ravi.. i've lost the hope that you'd blossom into an intellectual long ago.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> If he was born here and only spoke pig latin, there would be no violation of immigration laws.



how could such a thing happen, you already told us Kids "Always" learn English


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Actually, the ethnic heritage of white Americans is mainly British.  And the ethnic heritage of Jews and Arabs is basically the same. They are cousins. Just like we are cousins to the Brits.
> 
> 
> 
> hahahaha! You want an ethnic majority, you aren't fooling me.




european americans or heritage here in the usa is now 
mainly German, then irish, then english, then french, then italian,,,,i believe....read this a bit back, i will try to get u a link....


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> how could such a thing happen, you already told us Kids "Always" learn English



Maybe he's Michael Savage.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Maybe he's Michael Savage.



LOL, good one.

I know a little autistic boy, and he is anything but a little brat.

Savage is an idiot.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Really? There are more descendants of Germans in the US than descendants of Brits? I did not know that.



wiki....i was off on france and italy i think?  missed the poles altogether...of course this is just who reprted their ancestry i suppose?



> The largest ancestries in 2000, reporting over 5 million members, were in order: German, Irish, English, American, Italian, Polish, and French. They have different distributions within the United States;


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> wiki....i was off on france and italy i think?  missed the poles altogether...of course this is just who reprted their ancestry i suppose?



Everyone _always_ forgets the Poles.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

hitler didn't!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> wiki....i was off on france and italy i think?  missed the poles altogether...of course this is just who reprted their ancestry i suppose?



How come they don't lump the English and the Irish together? And which ancestry are they assigning to Americans?

Got a link, my friend?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> wiki....i was off on france and italy i think?  missed the poles altogether...of course this is just who reprted their ancestry i suppose?



If we keep up the current trend the majority will be Hispanic in decent before to long. Not saying that is bad, or good, just a fact.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

here is the link ravi, scrole down to bottom for census ancestry results by country
European American - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> How come they don't lump the English and the Irish together? And which ancestry are they assigning to Americans?
> 
> Got a link, my friend?



Because the Irish would kick their asses if they did. You do realize except for Northern Ireland the rest of Ireland is an independent nation right.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Because the Irish would kick their asses if they did. You do realize except for Northern Ireland the rest of Ireland is an independent nation right.


damn, I tried to rep you for that.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> here is the link ravi, scrole down to bottom for census ancestry results by country
> European American - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Okay, I'll check it out, thanks.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> If we keep up the current trend the majority will be Hispanic in decent before to long. Not saying that is bad, or good, just a fact.



and the language will reflect that.  It's inevitable.  And it's not necessarily a bad thing until we start disregarding the democratic will of current Americans.  Hell, we don't speak the same way our founding fathers did.  But, creating a language dissonance like we see in French Quebec leads to the same kind of fractured society.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> If we keep up the current trend the majority will be Hispanic in decent before to long. Not saying that is bad, or good, just a fact.



171 million in last census claimed EU heritage, 60%


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> 171 million in last census claimed EU heritage, 60%



yep, 60% and dropping, not to mention Spain is part of the EU


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and the language will reflect that.  It's inevitable.  And it's not necessarily a bad thing until we start disregarding the democratic will of current Americans.  Hell, we don't speak the same way our founding fathers did.  But, creating a language dissonance like we see in French Quebec leads to the same kind of fractured society.


not to mention if you are in any kind of manufacturing industry and you sell to them, you gotta pay to have instructions or features and benefits of the product, and country of origin in both french and english for the canadians....


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and the language will reflect that.  It's inevitable.  And it's not necessarily a bad thing until we start disregarding the democratic will of current Americans.  Hell, we don't speak the same way our founding fathers did.  But, creating a language dissonance like we see in French Quebec leads to the same kind of fractured society.




I of course agree, which is why I am for English as our official language.

As for Quebec, one of the funny things about that place is, in the rest of Canada all the signs are in both English in French, yet in Quebec they can be in only French. Hmmm hows that for fairness 

Not that they all are, but some are, and they can be. Clear double standard at work.

Maybe we should ask all these people against English as our official language, how they plan to pay for making all our signs in like 100 languages


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

MSDS in both eng and span, friggin w4s.  not to mention Applications.  Have you ever tried to train someone whose ONLY language is spanish?  it's rediculous.  Yet, ravi would have an employer prosecuted if every member of management were not fluent in spanish.


[youtube]RdotLSBbUug[/youtube]


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Sooner than you think.  And I would have no problem voting for one.
> 
> Kieth Ellison is a US congressman.
> 
> Can you find a single equivalent in israel?



you are sooooooo, as politely as i can say it, ill-informed!  sheesh!



> Among the first tasks of a new Knesset is to assign members to the various standing committees and to elect a speaker, his or her deputies, and the chairmen of committees. The speaker is assisted by a presidium of several deputies chosen by the Knesset from the major parties. At a minimum, the Knesset is required to hold two sessions a year and to sit not fewer than eight months during the two sessions. *The Knesset meets weekly to consider items on its agenda, but not on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays in deference to its Muslim, Jewish, and Christian members. *Agendas are set by the speaker to permit the questioning of ministers and the consideration of proposals from the government or motions from members. Time allocations to individual members and parties are made in advance by the speaker so as to preclude filibusters or cloture. Other than national emergencies, budgetary issues have usually been the most important items dealt with by the Knesset at any of its session.



Israel - The Knesset


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> you are sooooooo, as politely as i can say it, ill-informed!  sheesh!
> 
> 
> 
> Israel - The Knesset



I was going to call him on it, but I was being lazy.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I of course agree, which is why I am for English as our official language.
> 
> As for Quebec, one of the funny things about that place is, in the rest of Canada all the signs are in both English in French, yet in Quebec they can be in only French. Hmmm hows that for fairness
> 
> ...



How much documentation do you think is in Engrish IN MEXICO?  I dont really care if we are a latino majority 100 years from now.. but marginalizing the english speakers just isnt going to float.  



I have to say, Geno's steaks and his When Ordering Speak English sign makes my tail wag.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> you are sooooooo, as politely as i can say it, ill-informed!  sheesh!
> 
> 
> 
> Israel - The Knesset



Great!  Then you should have NO PROBLEM naming a MUSLIM with as much federal authority as a US Congressman.


Im fully aware how the Knesset works.  However, some token consideration in lieu of an ACTUAL muslim voice doesn't impress me.  Hell, even Iran has that laughable input from IT'S population of jews...  the LARGEST OUTSIDE OF ISREAL, might I add..  so what.


I'll wait.  feel free to start naming names anytime.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Hell, even Iran has that laughable input from IT'S population of jews...  the LARGEST OUTSIDE OF ISREAL, might I add..  so what.



Wrong the largest population of Jews outside Israel is the US by far.

there are 1.5 million more Jews in the US than in Israel.

Iran does not even make the list of the top 12 Jewish populations in the world.

World Jewish Population | Latest Statistics


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Great!  Then you should have NO PROBLEM naming a MUSLIM with as much federal authority as a US Congressman.
> 
> 
> Im fully aware how the Knesset works.  However, some token consideration in lieu of an ACTUAL muslim voice doesn't impress me.  Hell, even Iran has that laughable input from IT'S population of jews...  the LARGEST OUTSIDE OF ISREAL, might I add..  so what.
> ...



that's what the knesset members are silly....and they don't work fridays in honor of them and their holy day, friday!  i don't need to name a single member of the knesset....the knesset has muslims, period...as the link i supplied said....  that's good enough to show your ignorance on the issue, no?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

my bad.. IN THE MIDDLE EAST.


now, did you want to toss some names out or shall I go ahead and get the morton's salt out now?


Top 50 countries by Jewish population Rank 	Country 	Jews 	 % Jewish 	 % of all Jews
1 	United States 	6,150,000 	2% 	38.62%
2 	Israel 	5,600,000 	76.1% 	35.7%
3 	Russia 	800,000 	0.57% 	4.91%
4 	France 	606,561 	1% 	4.15%
5 	Canada 	393,660 	1.2% 	2.695%
6 	United Kingdom 	350,000 	0.6% 	1.97%
7 	Argentina 	250,000 	0.67% 	1.335%
8 	Germany 	220,000 	0.25% 	1.51%
9 	Ukraine 	142,276 	0.3% 	0.97%
10 	Australia 	120,000 	0.55% 	0.82%
11 	South Africa 	88,688 	0.04% 	0.61%
12 	Brazil 	200,000 	0.2% 	0.60%
13 	Belarus 	72,103 	0.7% 	<0.5%
14 	Hungary 	60,041 	0.6% 	<0.5%
15 	Mexico 	53,101 	0.05% 	<0.5%
16 	Belgium 	51,821 	0.5% 	<0.5%
17 	Spain 	48,409 	0.12% 	<0.5%
18 	Netherlands 	32,814 	0.2% 	<0.5%
19 	Moldova 	31,187 	0.7% 	<0.5%
20 	Uruguay 	30,743 	0.9% 	<0.5%
21 	Italy 	30,213 	0.052% 	<0.5%
22 	Chile 	25,375 	0.131% 	<0.5%
23 	Poland 	24,999 	0.065% 	<0.5%
24 	Venezuela 	20,900 	0.1% 	<0.5%
*25 	Iran 	20,405 	0.03% 	<0.5%*
26 	Ethiopia 	20,000 	0.027% 	<0.5%
27 	Sweden 	18,003 	0.2% 	<0.5%
28 	Uzbekistan 	17,453 	0.065% 	<0.5%
29 	Turkey 	17,415 	0.025% 	<0.5%
30 	India 	15,405 	0.005% 	<0.5%
31 	Switzerland 	14,649 	0.2% 	<0.5%
32 	Panama 	10,029 	0.33% 	<0.5%
33 	Latvia 	9,092 	0.397% 	<0.5%
34 	Austria 	8,184 	0.1% 	<0.5%
35 	Georgia 	7,951 	0.17% 	<0.5%
36 	Azerbaijan 	7,911 	0.1% 	<0.5%
37 	Denmark 	7,062 	0.13% 	<0.5%
38 	Romania 	6,029 	0.027% 	<0.5%
39 	New Zealand 	5,447 	0.135% 	<0.5%
40 	Greece 	5,334 	0.05% 	<0.5%
41 	Morocco 	5,236 	0.016% 	<0.5%
42 	Kazakhstan 	4,100 	0.027% 	<0.5%
43 	Lithuania 	3,596 	0.1% 	<0.5%
44 	Colombia 	7,436 	0.008% 	<0.5%
45 	Czech Republic 	3,072 	0.03% 	<0.5%
46 	Slovakia 	3,041 	0.056% 	<0.5%
47 	Peru 	2,800 	0.01% 	<0.5%
48 	Costa Rica 	2,409 	0.06% 	<0.5%
49 	Bulgaria 	2,300 	0.031% 	<0.5%
50 	Estonia 	1,818 	0.136% 	<0.5%


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Holy shit some 20 odd thousand Jews in Iran eh. stunning


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 23, 2008)

You wouldn't think there'd still be so many in Germany, of all places.
And what's the attraction of Brazil?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> that's what the knesset members are silly....and they don't work fridays in honor of them and their holy day, friday!  i don't need to name a single member of the knesset....the knesset has muslims, period...as the link i supplied said....  that's good enough to show your ignorance on the issue, no?



and There are jews represented in Iran too.  Does this reflect the will of the nation of Iran?  make me laugh some more, dude.


Knesset members are HARDLY akin to a US congressman, dude.  I realize that youd say so just to circumvent the comparison but gimme a break.  Politicians taking DAYS OFF!?!?!  no WAI!  This neither validates the claim that muslims are equally represented NOR illustrates a comparable position for palis in israel.  

Of course it's good enough for you.  You can't name names so go figure.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Holy shit some 20 odd thousand Jews in Iran eh. stunning




hey, not too shabby for the nation that you;d otherwise insist is trying to "wipe israel off the map"


Care to start naming names now?  While you are at it, why dont you go ahead and predict when we'll see an arab PM of israel.  You know.. since you insist that days off for politicians means that there is wuality in israel..


----------



## Shogun (Jul 23, 2008)

Maurice Motamed

Maurice Motamed (born 1945; sometimes transcribed from Persian as &#1605;&#1608;&#1585;&#1740;&#1587; &#1605;&#1593;&#1578;&#1605;&#1583 was elected in 2000 and again in 2004 as a member of the Iranian Parliament, representing the Jewish community which has by Iran's constitution retained a reserved seat since the Persian Constitution of 1906.

Maurice Motamed - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See how easy it is, dude?  Whats your hold up?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> hey, not too shabby for the nation that you;d otherwise insist is trying to "wipe israel off the map"



I am not the one insisting that, Amagannakillyouall is 

Why don't you look into hows those Jews are treated in Iran, I bet it not any better than Muslims in Israel.




Shogun said:


> Care to start naming names now?


No I will not name names, I never claimed there were any Muslims in the current government of Israel. 




Shogun said:


> While you are at it, why dont you go ahead and predict when we'll see an arab PM of israel.



probably never.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and There are jews represented in Iran too.  Does this reflect the will of the nation of Iran?  make me laugh some more, dude.
> 
> 
> Knesset members are HARDLY akin to a US congressman, dude.  I realize that youd say so just to circumvent the comparison but gimme a break.  Politicians taking DAYS OFF!?!?!  no WAI!  This neither validates the claim that muslims are equally represented NOR illustrates a comparable position for palis in israel.
> ...



you have proven yourself to be an absolute idiot....

there are 12 members right now and there have been 59 in total so far....and yes they have power, even head some comittees.....

Mohammad Barakeh

there's one....

the rest are HERE- Arab members of the Knesset - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

YOU were owned shogie!  not that i am in to that....!


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> you have proven yourself to be an absolute idiot....
> 
> there are 12 members right now and there have been 59 in total so far....and yes they have power, even head some comittees.....
> 
> ...



Thanks for the info Care, I knew there were some, but was to lazy to go looking for them, it appears so was Shog 

So now shog, how many of the 20 thousand Jews in Iran are in their Iranian government 

holy shit Majalli Wahabi a Muslim was once acting President of Israel. Wow, those Hateful Racist Jews must have really lost it then eh Shog.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

I would add that those 12 Muslim members are 10% of the total 120 members. While Muslims make up 16.2% of the population, Muslims constitute Israel's largest religious minority.

So that is pretty close to an accurate representation of the % of Muslims as a whole in the Government. 

But I am sure Shog will just tell us they are nothing but Token Muslims with no power at all. Then continue to rail about how Israel is a racist nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I would add that those 12 Muslim members are 10% of the total 120 members. While Muslims make up 16.2% of the population, Muslims constitute Israel's largest religious minority.
> 
> So that is pretty close to an accurate representation of the % of Muslims as a whole in the Government.
> 
> But I am sure Shog will just tell us they are nothing but Token Muslims with no power at all. Then continue to rail about how Israel is a racist nation.



how is it any different of our congress, both house and senate not having 50% women to match the population or having whatever percentage of blacks proportionate or Chinese proportionate or muslims represeted proportionately,  here in the usa?  

It just doesn't seem to happen that way, not even here it seems?

Care


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

Care4all said:


> how is it any different of our congress, both house and senate not having 50% women to match the population or having whatever percentage of blacks proportionate or Chinese proportionate or muslims represeted proportionately,  here in the usa?
> 
> It just doesn't seem to happen that way, not even here it seems?
> 
> Care



it isn't, but then I am sure Shog will say it is, and I am also sure he will never admit he just got served by you. 

Good job Care


----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Everyone _always_ forgets the Poles.


 
And oh my how the Poles probably wish _that_ only had been true in 1939, eh?

Yes, it is my understanding, as well, that the largest self-identified ethnic in America is German.

Not necessarily pureblooded Germans, of course, but Germans intermarried and bred with the other ethnics which make this land so interesting.

Myself, for example, an American mutt offsprung from among others, the Germans who originally settled Pennsylvania in the early 18th century.

Did you all know that at one time the Pennsylvania legislature actually debated whether to make German the "offical" language of the Keystone state?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

editec said:


> And oh my how the Poles probably wish _that_ only had been true in 1939, eh?
> 
> Yes, it is my understanding, as well, that the largest self-identified ethnic in America is German.
> 
> ...




Yeah I have heard that actually.

My self, I am part Hebrew, Part English, Part Irish, and Part German. Go figure.
I can't tell you how many times I have heard the joke, "your German ancestors persecuted your Hebrew ones"


----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Holy shit some 20 odd thousand Jews in Iran eh. stunning


 
_Oy_, that  Mossad is one _very_ effective intelligence organization.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

editec said:


> _Oy_, that  Mossad is one _very_ effective intelligence organization.



Yep, a damn site more effective than the CIA


----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Yep, a damn site more effective than the CIA


 
I happen to be reading _Legacy of Ashes,_ right now.

Assuming the whole thing isn't some very clever disinformation campaign, the CIA has a terrible record of providing information that POTUSs could ever use, a terrible record of lying to our leaders, and a not so very good record, either, of espionage generally.

It appears, based on this book, that the one thing they could do rather well was BUY allies, which helped them pull off the occassional overthrow of this leader or that that they became conviced were communists.

They were, for example, big financial backers and benfactors to the Ba' ath party which ran Iraq in the 50s.

Apparently the State Department thought of them as a menace to american foreign policy.

Interesting read for those so inclined.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 23, 2008)

editec said:


> I happen to be reading _Legacy of Ashes,_ right now.
> 
> Assuming the whole thing isn't some very clever disinformation campaign, the CIA has a terrible record of providing information that POTUSs could ever use, a terrible record of lying to our leaders, and a not so very good record, either, of espionage generally.
> 
> ...



I'll have to pick that up.

No need to tell me how lacking the CIA is.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 23, 2008)

editec said:


> And oh my how the Poles probably wish _that_ only had been true in 1939, eh?
> 
> Yes, it is my understanding, as well, that the largest self-identified ethnic in America is German.
> 
> ...



umm...that was a play on words...didn't Bush once forget Poland.

Anywho, I haven't digested Care's numbers yet. Not that I can actually see being for an official English language is much different than being for an official religion...it's all part of the same wish to keep the status quo.

Why exactly does anyone fear language change?


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 23, 2008)

Ravi said:


> umm...that was a play on words...didn't Bush once forget Poland.
> 
> Anywho, I haven't digested Care's numbers yet. Not that I can actually see being for an official English language is much different than being for an official religion...it's all part of the same wish to keep the status quo.
> 
> Why exactly does anyone fear language change?



OH NO-----now you're a lingo-phobe if you want English to be the official language in the US ??????
Hasn't the phobe thing played itself out yet ??


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2008)

hmmmmmm, where's shogun?

....just read that even in israel, both hebrew and arabic are their official languages with english also being taught.....


----------



## José (Jul 23, 2008)

I shake my head in utter disbelief when I see members of the board attributing 60 years of failure to achieve a two state solution to the final status of Jerusalem or the viability of a Palestinian state in the West Bank.

The right of the Palestinian people to live in Western Palestine is the *defining factor* in the development of the Palestinian national identity.

Palestinian representatives, from Abbas to Khaled Mashal may say anything they want in English to get money from the West.

But the moment any Palestinian leader compromises this right, held sacred by 95% of the Palestinian people, he will be immediately delegitimised and solemnly ignored by the Palestinian people.

But nevermind

Its not like this is some highbrow international conference on the Palestinian people organized and held at the Sorbonne.

Just a crappy Message Board where everybody talks about everything usually out of their asses.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

josé;726692 said:
			
		

> i Shake My Head In Utter Disbelief When I See Members Of The Board Attributing 60 Years Of Failure To Achieve A Two State Solution To The Final Status Of Jerusalem Or The Viability Of A Palestinian State In The West Bank.
> 
> The Right Of The Palestinian People To Live In Western Palestine Is The *defining Factor* In The Development Of The Palestinian National Identity.
> 
> ...



Pffffft


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Care4all said:


> hmmmmmm, where's shogun?
> 
> ....just read that even in israel, both hebrew and arabic are their official languages with english also being taught.....



lol

Okay, Care...I added up the numbers on your Wiki link, using the 2,000 Census data...

The combined total of Brits (British, English, Irish, Scottish and Scotch/Irish) is 65,330,022, which is greater than German at 42,841,569.

The mysterious Americans (20,625,093) could probably be thrown in with the Brits because, according to the link - _Mostly of British (mainly English and Scottish/Scots-Irish, but also Welsh as well) ancestry that they are unaware about or cannot trace. An increasing number are people of several different European nationalities, often four or more, none of which the person thinks are large enough to identify with (one typical example might be a person who is 1/4 Irish, 1/4 German, 1/4 Scottish, 1/8 Swedish, and 1/8 French)._

Either way, I WIN!!!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> and the language will reflect that.  It's inevitable.  And it's not necessarily a bad thing until we start disregarding the democratic will of current Americans.  Hell, we don't speak the same way our founding fathers did.  But, creating a language dissonance like we see in French Quebec leads to the same kind of fractured society.



missed this one

bwahahahahaha!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Care4all said:


> not to mention if you are in any kind of manufacturing industry and you sell to them, you gotta pay to have instructions or features and benefits of the product, and country of origin in both french and english for the canadians....


Yep, it's killing the Chinese to translate directions to all the products they sell us into English.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> hey, not too shabby for the nation that you;d otherwise insist is trying to "wipe israel off the map"



More evidence of your inability to separate Jews from Israelis. You really don't have an actual grasp of anything, do you?


----------



## editec (Jul 24, 2008)

> Irish, Scottish and Scotch/Irish


 
They are Not _English_, amigo.

Hence those pesky _other names_ for their ethnics that you are apparently ignoring.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

editec said:


> They are Not _English_, amigo.
> 
> Hence those pesky _other names_ for their ethnics that you are apparently ignoring.



No, but they are Brits, which is what I believe I originally claimed as the largest ethnic group in the US for white people.


----------



## Care4all (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> lol
> 
> Okay, Care...I added up the numbers on your Wiki link, using the 2,000 Census data...
> 
> ...


 
hey, don't shoot the messenger!  lol

I think that those that claim themselves as "American" and not American Indian, can certainly be included in with the English...

The Irish and scottish can be included in with the British, because of course, they are in Great Britain and you specifically said British, you did not say the English only....(these were groups of people that immigrated to this country later on, in the 1800's and 1900's and are English speaking groups)

sooooooooooo, go for it girl, you were right on the british here!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

*I am not the one insisting that, Amagannakillyouall is *

Is THAT what the ACTUAL quote was or shall we continue the charade?  Need more evidence like your mamma's ass whuppin paddle?

*
Why don't you look into hows those Jews are treated in Iran, I bet it not any better than Muslims in Israel.*

Well enough to tell Israel to fuck off when offered money to relocate, eh?  

*

No I will not name names, I never claimed there were any Muslims in the current government of Israel. *


Well whatsa matter, big guy?  I thought your fanfare is saying that you've handed my ass to me?  If I can pull a fucking name from IRAN then SURELY, fucking SURELY you can do the same in this utopian jewish paradise that apparently treats it's population equal despite ethnicity, eh?  Come on, dude.. don't puss out.   I've named a jew in iran's parlaiment and a muslim in America's Congress.  WHY CANT YOU DO THE SAME FOR AN ARAB IN ISRAELS GOV?




*probably never.*


Well why not, buddy?  Are you ever going to admit the racist nature of having to maintain a JEWISH STATE?  Should the ghost of Strom Thurman be told that ******* will never serve as OUR el presidente?  What ethnic population can THE US go ahead and let know that they are not racially pure enough to sit in our highest office?  Hell, im ALL FOR jews holding Merkel's office... Geee, pal... whats the problem with equality?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Care4all said:


> you have proven yourself to be an absolute idiot....
> 
> there are 12 members right now and there have been 59 in total so far....and yes they have power, even head some comittees.....
> Mohammad Barakeh
> ...




Cool!  Now, when do you think a guy like that will be elected PM of Israel?  Can you give the same answer to a muslim elected in the US?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

> Opinion over the condition of Jews in Iran is divided. One Jew active in arguing on behalf of a benevolence view of the Iranian Islamic government and society toward Jews is film producer Haroun Yashyaei, who tells visitors and reporters the Ayatollah "Ruhollah Khomeini didn't mix up our community with Israel and Zionism," and "Take it from me, the Jewish community here faces no difficulties."<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-27">[28]</sup> Privately many Jews complain to foreign reporters of "discrimination, much of it of a social or bureaucratic nature." The Islamic government appoints the officials who run Jewish schools, most of these being Muslims and requires that those schools must open on Saturdays, the Jewish Sabbath. Criticism of this policy was the downfall of the last remaining newspaper of the Iranian Jewish community which was closed in 1991 after it criticized government control of Jewish schools.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-28">[29]</sup>


History of the Jews in Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yep, they sure sound equal to me. 
<sup id="cite_ref-28" class="reference"></sup>


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Thanks for the info Care, I knew there were some, but was to lazy to go looking for them, it appears so was Shog
> 
> So now shog, how many of the 20 thousand Jews in Iran are in their Iranian government
> 
> holy shit Majalli Wahabi a Muslim was once acting President of Israel. Wow, those Hateful Racist Jews must have really lost it then eh Shog.





Oh WOW!  You mean the house negra gets to watch the house while the massa goes on a trip?  How GENERAOUS is the massa!



And, Iran has had a jew in their gov since 1908.  Go ask Iranian jews if they are treated poor enough to be lured to isreal by cash!


Now, when will an arab ever be elected PM of Israel, again?  What was that?  Never, you say?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I would add that those 12 Muslim members are 10% of the total 120 members. While Muslims make up 16.2% of the population, Muslims constitute Israel's largest religious minority.
> 
> So that is pretty close to an accurate representation of the % of Muslims as a whole in the Government.
> 
> ...



You are goddamn right they are.  Given titles and status despite the plight of the rest of the arabs is a pretty big indicator.  

here are some Nazi Jews.. You tell me what this is supposed to validate.
Nazi Jews: A Historical Paradox | THE CUBAN REVOLUTION


and yes.  Israel IS a racist nation.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> it isn't, but then I am sure Shog will say it is, and I am also sure he will never admit he just got served by you.
> 
> Good job Care



While I AM glad to see that there ARE arabs in the knesset.. a fact I will freely admit that i did not know, I still have a problem with your statement saying that Muslims can never be the PM of israel.  I STILL have a problem with any nation that insists on an ethnic standard for a special population.  Hell, if anything, posting evidence of peaceful arabs working with the Knesset PROVES that a single state solution, and equality for all, WILL work.

Go ahead, have your happy dance now.  You both deserve it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yep, it's killing the Chinese to translate directions to all the products they sell us into English.



Speaking of which.. how many Chinese dialects are there and HOW many years was that nation at war with each other?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 24, 2008)

Care4all said:


> hey, don't shoot the messenger!  lol
> 
> I think that those that claim themselves as "American" and not American Indian, can certainly be included in with the English...
> 
> ...



You will find the Irish extremely_un_willing to be included as 'British', I should think, whereas the Cymry, the people you call 'Welsh' ARE the British, originally anyway.   Since our national consciousness was at an extrmely low ebb in the early colonial days, our contribution doesn't show up well in your history, but those who go in for such things assure me, for instance, that eighteen of the signatories of the Declaration of Independence were of 'Welsh' descent.    The was a very interesting (Welsh-language) series a few years back on S4C about the contribution of our people to the Northern Army, and there's speculation that the surprisingly large number of Welsh names amonst American Black People come not from Welsh slave-owners (very thin on the ground) but from admired Welsh chaplains who preached to those set free.   As I understand it, an increasing number of Americans are now realising their actual origins in Cymru.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> More evidence of your inability to separate Jews from Israelis. You really don't have an actual grasp of anything, do you?



Do you need an actual translation, admitted AFTER THE FACT by news sources, or just a cookie and some bubbles?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> History of the Jews in Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Yep, they sure sound equal to me.
> <sup id="cite_ref-28" class="reference"></sup>



who said anything about EQUAL?  Muslims are not EQUAL in isreal either.  The question was how ere they threated.  And, again, the answer is, apparently well enough to tell isreal to fuck off when lured with cash bribes.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Here, both Care and Chucky..  NBC Nightly NEWS last night 7/23/08

msnbc.com Video Player


enjoy


----------



## editec (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> No, but they are Brits, which is what I believe I originally claimed as the largest ethnic group in the US for white people.


 
Hell, might as well include the sub continental asian Indians Afghanis and Pakis, if we're going to include BRITISH EMPIRE as an specific ethnic.

Hey, I don't much care. It's a goofy thing to really argue about, Ravi.

But the Scots don't think of themselves as BRITISH and neither do the Irish.

And remember that I was talking about SELF-indentifying ethnic heritage, right?

The Irish had their own language and culture, unique and different than the English, as did the Scots, and as I was talking about self identifying ethnic cultures, we might as well throw in the Welsh, too, while we're at it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

editec said:


> Hell, might as well include the sub continental asian Indians Afghanis and Pakis, if we're going to include BRITISH EMPIRE as an specific ethnic.
> 
> Hey, I don't much care. It's a goofy thing to really argue about, Ravi.
> 
> ...



Yes, it is a goofy thing to argue about. Just as goofy as trying to argue that our country has the right to tell another country what their standard for citizenship must be...and yet, here we are.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

uh, how does the US restrict put a premium an any ethnicity again?  Do we PRESERVE the dominance of white people, ravi?


Do you make the same argument for Aryans in Germany?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> uh, how does the US restrict put a premium an any ethnicity again?  Do we PRESERVE the dominance of white people, ravi?
> 
> 
> Do you make the same argument for Aryans in Germany?



Israel doesn't restrict for ethnicity. It restricts for religion.

Israeli nationality law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And yes, it is my opinion that people that wish to make English the official language and force people to use it are attempting to preserve the ethnic heritage of the majority.

Notice Saudi Arabia has similar restrictions and I don't hear you crying about them, oh, right, because they're not a democracy. As if that matters.

Saudi Arabia Guide: Citizenship, Is it possible to become a national of Saudi Arabia? As a foreigner, you won

btw, Germany was a democracy so your way of thinking makes their actions valid. As if.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

First, ENGLISH is not an ethnicity.  Lot's of non-whites speak it.  It's a CULTURAL preservation.

Second, jumping back and forth between weather being jewish is an ETHNICITY or RELIGION is as much laughable as it is disingenuous.  I posted the laws of return, ravikins.  ignore whatever you want to.
*
Israel is, by its own definition, the state of the Jewish nation, and its leadership believes that one of its primary objectives is keeping a Jewish majority in Israel.[citation needed] Thus, Israeli nationality law is created with a bias in favor of those with Jewish heritage.*
your link, brainiac.


Indeed, germany ELECTED hitler into office so, by your standard, who were we to have anything to say about the holocaust, eh?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> First, ENGLISH is not an ethnicity.  Lot's of non-whites speak it.  It's a CULTURAL preservation.
> 
> Second, jumping back and forth between weather being jewish is an ETHNICITY or RELIGION is as much laughable as it is disingenuous.  I posted the laws of return, ravikins.  ignore whatever you want to.
> *
> ...



I knew I should have posted it for you. Scroll down and read 
*Acquisition of citizenship*


and read the entire thing, don't just go looking for something to support your belief.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

I did read it, ravi.  Now, do you NEED me to post the definition of JEW?  Specifically, the ethnic aspect of that identification?  FURTHER, the ETHNIC STANDARD involved with maintaining a "jewish" state?


Evidence, rav.. it's whats for dinner.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

*Acquisition of citizenship*

By return

The Law of Return *defines that all Jews* possessing an Oleh's certificate shall become Israel nationals and allowed to immigrate to Israel. Such a *certificate would almost automatically turn into Israeli citizenship upon arrival in Israel* if so desired. In the 1970s the Law of Return was further expanded, and it was defined that the spouse of a Jew, the children of a Jew and their spouses, and the grandchildren of a Jew and their spouses would also be covered under the Law of Return and thus be eligible for an Oleh's certificate provided that the Jew on behalf of whom they request the certificate did not practice a religion other than Judaism willingly (*he or she may, however, be a non-observant Jew*). In 1999, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that *Jews or the descendants of Jews* that actively practice a religion other than Judaism would not be allowed to immigrate to Israel as they would no longer be considered Jews under the provisions of the Law of Return.

Israeli legislators chose to make a clear distinction between the Law of Return, which allows for *Jews and their descendants* to immigrate to Israel, and between Israel's nationality law, which formally grants Israeli citizenship based on the Oleh's certificate. In other words, the Law of Return in and of itself does not determine Israeli citizenship; it merely allows for Jews and their eligible descendants to permanently relocate within the territory of Israel. The state of Israel does, however, grant citizenship to any applicant who immigrated to Israel via the Law of Return if the applicant so desires, though this is not mandated by the Law of Return itself.

Another important distinction should be made between Israeli citizens who live abroad and Jewish persons who are covered under the provisions of the Law of Return. A non-Israel Jew or an eligible descendant of a non-Israel Jew needs to request approval to immigrate to Israel, a request which can be denied for a variety of reasons including (but not limited to): possession of a criminal record, currently infected with a contagious disease, or otherwise viewed as a threat to Israeli society. Israeli citizens on the other hand are allowed to travel within the borders of Israel whenever they so desire without limitation. Israeli citizens are also the only persons allowed to obtain an Israeli passport. Eligible applicants under the Law of Return have no claim to any of the rights or privileges of an Israeli citizen unless they are formally cleared by the government, given an Oleh's certificate, and granted Israeli citizenship.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I did read it, ravi.  Now, do you NEED me to post the definition of JEW?  Specifically, the ethnic aspect of that identification?  FURTHER, the ETHNIC STANDARD involved with maintaining a "jewish" state?
> 
> 
> Evidence, rav.. it's whats for dinner.


I guess you are having trouble because you think Jew only means ethnicity...it can mean either. And the way the Israelis are defining it as a condition of citizenship is as a religion, not as an ethnic background. Give it another read.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Hey, you can deny the BIRTHRIGHT (highlighted just for you) of the title if you want to.  I really dont care.  Arguing that being jewish is NOT an ethnicity, merely a religion, is a sad fucking joke on your part.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Hey, you can deny the BIRTHRIGHT (highlighted just for you) of the title if you want to.  I really dont care.  Arguing that being jewish is NOT an ethnicity, merely a religion, is a sad fucking joke on your part.



Clearly Jew is both a religion and a ethnicity. I am by birth part Hebrew(Jew) but by upbringing not a Jew, as I was raised a Christian, and now think of myself as an agnostic.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Clearly Jew is both a religion and a ethnicity. I am by birth part Hebrew(Jew) but by upbringing not a Jew, as I was raised a Christian, and now think of myself as an agnostic.



the last jewish gal I dated was also agnostic raised by parents of the same.. But does your faith minimize the ethnic element to your jewish background?


not that any state that puts a premium on a particular faith is any better.


Did you notice that i gave you and Care your due props on the knesset thing?  Just want to make you that doesn't go by the wayside since the occasion is like a blue moon around here.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> the last jewish gal I dated was also agnostic raised by parents of the same.. But does your faith minimize the ethnic element to your jewish background?
> 
> 
> not that any state that puts a premium on a particular faith is any better.
> ...



Didn't see that, must of got buried in the sea of posts that seems to flow on this board. Thanks for the props, admitting your wrong about something when it turns out you are is a sure sign of class and good character.

I have never been one to say Israel is a nation of Saints or anything, but I do believe they are a damn site better than most Muslim nations.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

And, in turn, i've never insisted that israel must be driven into the sea.  Every nation and all humans have the capacity for the same kind of human marginalization.  jews are not impervious to the same motivation that elected hitler.  And, Arab nations are NOT my ideal standard of state governments.  But they don't claim to be western.  Israel does.  I don't expect those nations on our side to use the same excuses as those we fight against.  I'd love to see Iran reflect western democracy.. But ignoring our lil buddy acting like they were once treated in Europe just doesn't fly with me.  This is why i've been adamant about a single state solution.  If 10% of the Knesset can function already then the apocalyptic predictions of those who refuse to extend equality to ALL pals and jews and christians is plain rubbish.  Anything less than blind equality, and no regard for a special status, only put isreal in the same basket as those muslim states rather than ours.  








anyway.. until the next time this issue blossoms..


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> And, in turn, i've never insisted that israel must be driven into the sea.  Every nation and all humans have the capacity for the same kind of human marginalization.  jews are not impervious to the same motivation that elected hitler.  And, Arab nations are NOT my ideal standard of state governments.  But they don't claim to be western.  Israel does.  I don't expect those nations on our side to use the same excuses as those we fight against.  I'd love to see Iran reflect western democracy.. But ignoring our lil buddy acting like they were once treated in Europe just doesn't fly with me.  This is why i've been adamant about a single state solution.  If 10% of the Knesset can function already then the apocalyptic predictions of those who refuse to extend equality to ALL pals and jews and christians is plain rubbish.  Anything less than blind equality, and no regard for a special status, only put isreal in the same basket as those muslim states rather than ours.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I would assume those 12 Muslims in the Israeli Knesset, do not reflect the views of some of the more radical Muslims in Hamas and the other groups, If they did I doubt they would have been elected.

However I will allow that I could be wrong about my vision for Israel, which I have stated is a 2 state solution based on the 67 borders. In fact I hope I am, But I still doubt it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Ill reply with the same quote I gave you once before.


If you will it, it is no dream.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Hey, you can deny the BIRTHRIGHT (highlighted just for you) of the title if you want to.  I really dont care.  Arguing that being jewish is NOT an ethnicity, merely a religion, is a sad fucking joke on your part.



Nope, you are still wrong. Here's another link you can read. 



> Today, approximately five million Jews, more than         a third of the world's Jewish population,         live in the land of Israel. Jews make up more than eighty percent of the         population of the land, and Jews are in political control of the land, though         non-Jews who become citizens of Israel have the same legal rights as Jewish         citizens of Israel. In fact, there are a few Arab members of the Knesset         (the Israeli parliament).





> Jews continue to immigrate to Israel in large numbers. Immigration to Israel         is referred to as aliyah (literally, ascension). Under Israel's Law of Return,         any Jew who has not renounced the Jewish faith         (by converting to another religion) can automatically become an Israeli citizen,         somewhat similar to the way Ireland gives automatic citizenship to second         or third generation descendants of Irish citizens.         Gentiles may also become citizens of Israel         after undergoing a standard naturalization process, much like the one required         to become a United States citizen.


Judaism 101: The Land of Israel


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

HOLY SHIT!?!?!?!?

JEWFAQ!?!?!?  WOW!  I CANT BELIEVE IT!  NEXT THING YOU KNOW, JPOST WILL STOP POSTING VIDEOS OF JEWISHS SETTLERS! BEATING PALIS


sarcasm off.


like I said.. believe what you want.  Take Chuck's testimony or don't.  I don't care if you comprehend or not.  As with every other thread youve participated in you continue to hope that purposeful ignorance will trump the fact of JEWISH ETHNICITY and the state based preservation of that particular influence.


if any other nation did the same thing against mexicans, women or jews you'd be screaming like a fucking tornado siren.  As it is.. well.. again, it's a typical ravi reaction.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> HOLY SHIT!?!?!?!?
> 
> JEWFAQ!?!?!?  WOW!  I CANT BELIEVE IT!  NEXT THING YOU KNOW, JPOST WILL STOP POSTING VIDEOS OF JEWISHS SETTLERS! BEATING PALIS
> 
> ...



We do something similar. If you are born in the USA or born anywhere to American parents, you are automatically a citizen.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

American citizenship is not based on ethnicity, dumbass.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> American citizenship is not based on ethnicity, dumbass.


Neither is Israeli. It's based on RELIGION.  If you were born a Jew in another country than Israel and converted to Islam or Christianity, you'd lose your right of Return. 

You really should try reading the wiki link, it lays it out pretty clearly.
_
In 1999, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that Jews or the descendants of Jews that actively practice a religion other than Judaism would *not* be allowed to immigrate to Israel as they would no longer be considered Jews under the provisions of the Law of Return._

And in that case, one would have to apply through naturalization, just like anyone else.

I suppose you have an issue with the right of Return and I'm not sure why. If it was the only way someone could become an Israeli, you might have a point, though I'd still probably disagree with you. But it isn't the only way. So why do you take issue with it?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Again, stupid, take Chuck's word that it's not merely his RELIGION that makes him jewish. Nor is it merely RELIGION that is the midigating criteria in the Law of return.. reread your fucking evidence, ATHEIST JEWS COUNT.


WOW you are one dumb motherfucker, ravi.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Neither is Israeli. It's based on RELIGION.  If you were born a Jew in another country than Israel and converted to Islam or Christianity, you'd lose your right of Return.
> 
> You really should try reading the wiki link, it lays it out pretty clearly.
> _
> ...



Israel itself is based on one thing. Jewish supremecy. Nothing will happen in Israel that endangers Jewish supremecy. Please note I am NOT saying merely Jewish existence. Forget ANY single state solution and don't bet on a two state solution either unless Israel will offer up a reasonable partition of land instead of little "islands" that the control access to.


----------



## editec (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yes, it is a goofy thing to argue about. Just as goofy as trying to argue that our country has the right to tell another country what their standard for citizenship must be...and yet, here we are.


 
I'm not responsible for the arguments others make.

And FWIW, I don't much care about what ethnics are in America, either.

My blood is such a mixture of people who came from someplace in Europe, that the whole American ethnic pride thing sort of amuses me.

My culture and ethnic are American, that's all I really understand.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Again, stupid, take Chuck's word that it's not merely his RELIGION that makes him jewish. Nor is it merely RELIGION that is the midigating criteria in the Law of return.. reread your fucking evidence, ATHEIST JEWS COUNT.
> 
> 
> WOW you are one dumb motherfucker, ravi.



Atheist Jews are not practicing another religion.

Charles, could you tell us how you came to be a dual citizen of Israel and the US?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Atheist Jews are not practicing another religion.
> 
> Charles, could you tell us how you came to be a dual citizen of Israel and the US?



Sigh, how many times do I have to say this, I have said it like 10 times now. My mother was an Israeli citizen, She made me a Citizen of Israel when I was 2 years old.

The problem here is people often use the word Jew to Describe both the religion of Judaism and the Race of Hebrews.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Okay, Charles, I see from another thread you were more than likely made an Israeli citizen before the ruling that those practicing other religions could not be Israelis. Edit: because your mother was an Israeli.

So there you have it. Whatever it was before 1999, it is now a religious requirement, a naturalization requirement, or a born to Israeli parents requirement.

Not an ethnic requirement, Shog.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Dance al you want to, Rav but you are still wrong.  Under the right of return it's not Chucky's RELIGON that would let him back in.. It's his mother's citizenship and ethnic heritage.  Try to pad that as much as you need to but those ARE the facts.

Some converted former Irish fucking Catholic is not going to qualify like former atheist Hershel Goldstien.  Walter Sobchak is not as qualified as Moses fucking Lieberman.


But, believe that being jewish is merely a faith if you wanna.  Correcting your stupidity is not my problem.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Okay, Charles, I see from another thread you were more than likely made an Israeli citizen before the ruling that those practicing other religions could not be Israelis. Edit: because your mother was an Israeli.
> 
> So there you have it. Whatever it was before 1999, it is now a religious requirement, a naturalization requirement, or a born to Israeli parents requirement.
> 
> Not an ethnic requirement, Shog.



Yep. I was in 1975.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Dance al you want to, Rav but you are still wrong.  Under the right of return it's not Chucky's RELIGON that would let him back in.. It's his ethnic heritage.  Try to pad that as much as you need to but those ARE the facts.
> 
> Some converted former Irish fucking Catholic is not going to qualify like former atheist Hershel Goldstien.
> 
> ...



I never once said it was merely a faith. You are claiming the Israelis are racists. You are incorrect if your only evidence is that they only allow citizenship based on ethnic heritage since that is FALSE.

You are truly an idiot. And perhaps a racist yourself.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

LOLOLOL!

oh NOW you never insisted that their standard of determining who qualifies for the right of return is NOT based on JEWISH HERITAGE??  THAT you never said that the standard was merely RELIGION?

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!



oook,, ravi.  like I said.. believe what you want.  Call me a racist if you NEED to.  I could excercise the ghost of Moses himself and you'd insist that it's merely his FAITH that qualifies his jewish heritage.  You know, despite the fucking lineage from him to fucking sandy koufax proving otherwise.


just.. shut the fuck up and enjoy a Big Labowski quote


Walter Sobchak: I'm saying, I see what you're getting at, Dude, he kept the money. My point is, here we are, it's shabbas, the sabbath, which I'm allowed to break only if it's a matter of life or death...
The Dude: Will you come off it, Walter? You're not even fucking Jewish, man.
Walter Sobchak: What the fuck are you talkin' about?
The Dude: Man, you're fucking Polish Catholic...
Walter Sobchak: What the fuck are you talking about? I converted when I married Cynthia! Come on, Dude!
The Dude: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah...
Walter Sobchak: And you know this!
The Dude: Yeah, and five fucking years ago you were divorced.
Walter Sobchak: So what are you saying? When you get divorced you turn in your library card? You get a new license? You stop being Jewish?
The Dude: It's all a part of your sick Cynthia thing, man. Taking care of her fucking dog. Going to her fucking synagogue. You're living in the fucking past.
Walter Sobchak: Three thousand years of beautiful tradition, from Moses to Sandy Koufax...
[shouting]
Walter Sobchak: You're goddamn right I'm living in the fucking past!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> LOLOLOL!
> 
> oh NOW you never insisted that their standard of determining who qualifies for the right of return is NOT based on JEWISH HERITAGE??  THAT you never said that the standard was merely RELIGION?
> 
> ...



You can't read, can you. I said that Jewish was not just an ethnicity, it was also a religion. But more importantly I said that the Israelis base their immigration status on religion, not ethnicity.

And I've shown you that is true. If you continue to claim that Israelis only allow ethnic Jews citizenship, then yes, you are racist.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> You can't read, can you.* I said that Jewish was not just an ethnicity,* it was also a religion. But more importantly I said that the Israelis base their immigration status on religion, not ethnicity.
> 
> And I've shown you that is true. If you continue to claim that Israelis only allow ethnic Jews citizenship, then yes, you are racist.





LOLOLOL!

you FUCKING LIAR.




post 802


and I quote:

*
Neither is Israeli. It's based on RELIGION. If you were born a Jew in another country than Israel and converted to Islam or Christianity, you'd lose your right of Return.*


oh this is fun watching you LIE to feel less stupid!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> LOLOLOL!
> 
> you FUCKING LIAR.
> 
> ...



Do please try to follow along.

_American citizenship is not based on ethnicity, dumbass. - Shog the Asshole

_
    Neither is Israeli. It's based on RELIGION. - Ravi's answer

Citizenship is based on religion, not ethnic heritage. It's what I've been claiming all along, and it is the truth.

You are a sad person.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

You guys argue like a married couple you know that


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Do please try to follow along.
> 
> _American citizenship is not based on ethnicity, dumbass. - Shog the Asshole
> 
> ...



AND CLEARLY ITS NOT JUST BASED ON RELIGION IN REGARDS TO THE RIGHT OF RETURN, YA CUNTY MCCUNT.

goood fucking grief.  I posted the law of return fucking PAGES ago and you think LYING about it now is going to raise your goddamn IQ.


trust me.  it's not.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

When are you guys going to have the make up sex is what I want to know.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> AND CLEARLY ITS NOT JUST BASED ON RELIGION IN REGARDS TO THE RIGHT OF RETURN



It didn't used to be, but it is now. 

I'm glad you learned something, even if you can't bring yourself to admit it. 

Methinks you owe the Israelis a thank you for bending on this issue.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> When are you guys going to have the make up sex is what I want to know.


lol, he's not my type.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 24, 2008)

i dont owe israel shit.  Like I said, some polish catholic converting to their religion wont count like a Cohen would.

but, i realize you just wanna flirt with me anyway so.. have at it.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

*burp*


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 24, 2008)

Ravi said:


> *burp*



Excuse you.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 24, 2008)

thh


----------



## Rhys (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> You can't read, can you. I said that Jewish was not just an ethnicity, it was also a religion. But more importantly I said that the Israelis base their immigration status on religion, not ethnicity.
> 
> And I've shown you that is true. If you continue to claim that Israelis only allow ethnic Jews citizenship, then yes, you are racist.



You do not understand what racist means, do you?  Do talk to someone educated about it.

I know a very large number of people who would call themselves 'Jews', a few of them Israeli citizens, and the number of them who would claim to be religious _in any sense_ is tiny.   The noises you use to describe your master people hardly matter (though of course, 'Israel' will accept almost any one who is not a native of the colony, at least for now).  

If the old South African Nationalist Government had described itself as 'Complexionist' and announced it didn't care about 'race', would that have changed anything?   What do your merry chums care what the game is called, so long as they can thieve and murder at will, and then denounce their victims as 'terrorists'?

The expelled millions outside your borders are waiting still.   How do you propose to eliminate them, Oh Religious One?   Perhaps the Lord will provide?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Rhys said:


> You do not understand what racist means, do you?  Do talk to someone educated about it.
> 
> I know a very large number of people who would call themselves 'Jews', a few of them Israeli citizens, and the number of them who would claim to be religious _in any sense_ is tiny.   The noises you use to describe your master people hardly matters (though of course, 'Israel' will accept almost any one who is not a native of the colony, at least for now).
> 
> ...



That wasn't the topic of conversation. The topic was what criteria is used to allow someone to become an Israeli citizen.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> That wasn't the topic of conversation. The topic was what criteria is used to allow someone to become an Israeli citizen.



It is pretty cut and dried.  Fully 20% of Israel's population is Arab with full citizenship rights of which the huge majority are Palestinian or of Palestinian heritage.  Those who hold no animosity toward Israel and the Jews enjoy prosperity and own businesses, teach in the universities, and are represented on the Knesset.  Those who retain loyalties to the militant Palestinian non-Israelis fare less well and complain of discrimination.  (Personally I think they should be invited out of the country, but that's just me.)

Because of its very nature and the purpose for which the nation was founded, the 'right of return' remains in effect for Jews wanting to move to Israel and become citizens.  The laws do focus on and cater to Jews though the government is working on ways to make things less complicated for non-Jews.  Non-Jews who want to immigrate and be productive and loyal Israeli citizens are welcome in Israel.



> According to section 1 of the Law of Return [1950] ("LOR"), any Jew is entitled by right
> (the "Right of Return") to immigrate to Israel.
> The above also applies to the spouse, children and grandchildren of a Jew, and to the
> spouse of such children or grandchildren, even if they themselves are not Jewish. The
> ...





> (a) A person of full age, not being an Israel national, may obtain Israel nationality by naturalisation if -
> (1) he is in Israel; and
> (2) he has been in Israel for three years out of five years proceeding the day of the submission of his application; and
> (3) he is entitled to reside in Israel permanently; and
> ...


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Yes, Foxfire, thank you. One of the posters on this thread was claiming that only those of a Jewish ethnicity were allowed to be citizens of Israel.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 25, 2008)

You're welcome.  It's pretty hard to accuse the Israelis of racism or guilty of ethnic cleansing when 20% of the population is made up of citizens of Arab ancestry with no Jewish connections of any kind.

The only Arabs the Israelis have a problem with are those devoted to the extermination of Israel and the Jews, most particularly those actively attempting to accomplish that by kidnapping and killing Israeli citizens, blowing up crowded markets, synagogues, and bussses, and firing many thousands of rockets indiscriminatley into Israeli neighborhoods.

The Israelis are 100% justified in retaliation against such activity and/or defending their own people in whatever ways they feel are necessary to defend them.  Such of course does cause grief, displacement, and injustice to innocent Palestinians as well, but such is the most tragic result of all wars.  The Palestinians would have nothing to fear from the Israelis and would find the Israelis to be good neighbors and trading partners if they would simply agree to Israel's right to exist and would be good neighbors to Israel.

Israelis are not the racists in this conflict.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

*Because of its very nature and the purpose for which the nation was founded, the 'right of return' remains in effect for Jews wanting to move to Israel and become citizens. The laws do focus on and cater to Jews though the government is working on ways to make things less complicated for non-Jews*


I didnt say that ONLY jews were allowed into israel, ravi.. ONCE again, you are a *fucking liar* and I welcome you to quote me saying anything of the sort.  I posted the LAW OF RETURN specifically as an example of the state of israel putting a premium on the jewish ethnicity.  FOX rationalized this.  so do you.  Trying to be a scandelous fucking liar about my posts wont get you anywhere.


Indeed, if the US allowed all ethnicities BUT MADE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO PUT A PREMIUM ON WHITE FOLK you'd be crying like a fucking stuck pig.  As it is, you can accept racist double standard for israel.  don't bother poking your grubby fucking finger at William Joyce anymore in one of his racist as threads because the irony of your position makes you a total fucking farce.. when you are not lying out your ass, that is.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

*You're welcome.  It's pretty hard to accuse the Israelis of racism or guilty of ethnic cleansing when 20% of the population is made up of citizens of Arab ancestry with no Jewish connections of any kind.*


uh, so too did the US have a significant population of blacks in 1945.  What is your point again?  South Africa had blacks in 1983.  Did you need to clarify?


*
The only Arabs the Israelis have a problem with are those devoted to the extermination of Israel and the Jews, most particularly those actively attempting to accomplish that by kidnapping and killing Israeli citizens, blowing up crowded markets, synagogues, and bussses, and firing many thousands of rockets indiscriminatley into Israeli neighborhoods.*

HA!  yea, and when you people GENERALIZE any arab as merely a terrorist in training..

Watch any good videos lately?  I've posted a few you'll want to insist is just antisemitic propaganda.. from the NBC nightly news even!


*
The Israelis are 100% justified in retaliation against such activity and/or defending their own people in whatever ways they feel are necessary to defend them.  Such of course does cause grief, displacement, and injustice to innocent Palestinians as well, but such is the most tragic result of all wars.  The Palestinians would have nothing to fear from the Israelis and would find the Israelis to be good neighbors and trading partners if they would simply agree to Israel's right to exist and would be good neighbors to Israel.
*


yea yea yea.. and the only good INJUN is a dead one, right?  You people and your blank check worhsip of the new master race would be laughable were it not so pathetic.  Jews are just as capable of the same bullshit anyone else is.  Don't believe it?  go ask the ghost of Rabin about those oh so benevolent zionists.


*
Israelis are not the racists in this conflict.*


The law of return IS racist.  If you can't fathom the same application for whitey in the US then you probably want to go ahead and whip out your scarlet A.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

msnbc.com Video Player


Here ya go, fox.. Go ahead and IGNORE THIS TOO.  Why is it that settlers are not supposed to reflect on israel... but a terrorist reflects ALL palis?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> You're welcome.  It's pretty hard to accuse the Israelis of racism or guilty of ethnic cleansing when 20% of the population is made up of citizens of Arab ancestry with no Jewish connections of any kind.
> 
> The only Arabs the Israelis have a problem with are those devoted to the extermination of Israel and the Jews, most particularly those actively attempting to accomplish that by kidnapping and killing Israeli citizens, blowing up crowded markets, synagogues, and bussses, and firing many thousands of rockets indiscriminatley into Israeli neighborhoods.
> 
> ...



I imagine there are racists on both sides of the issue. 

It's interesting to note that the right of Return is now not applied to anyone of Jewish heritage that practices a different religion.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 25, 2008)

Why shouldn't people be able to organize a nation for 'white folk' if you have enough 'white folk' who want that kind of environment?  I wouldn't want to live there, but what is wrong with the concept?  What rationale is there for anybody to not have the right to organize a country for a particular group so long as nobody's civil rights are violated in the process?

Japan's laws for citizenship, work permits, immigration laws, etc. etc. certainly favor those of Japanese ancestry.  I wouldn't want to live there either, but I don't have a problem with that.  What is wrong with that?

The Jews, however, are a unique situation.  The Jews have been systematically persecuted, discriminated against, and have suffered ethnic cleansing most places in the world for most of their entire history. They have had no homeland where they could ensure protection from discrimination because they are Jews since 70 A.D.  So, considering all that dismal history coupled with the Holocaust at the hands of Nazi Germany, the world community, via the UN, tried to set things right in a small way by giving a tiny TINY plot of ground to the Jews where they could finally have ability to determine their own destiny.

For the life of me, I can't see how anybody should have a problem with that.


----------



## Reality (Jul 25, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Why shouldn't people be able to organize a nation for 'white folk' if you have enough 'white folk' who want that kind of environment?  I wouldn't want to live there, but what is wrong with the concept?  What rationale is there for anybody to not have the right to organize a country for a particular group so long as nobody's civil rights are violated in the process?
> 
> Japan's laws for citizenship, work permits, immigration laws, etc. etc. certainly favor those of Japanese ancestry.  I wouldn't want to live there either, but I don't have a problem with that.  What is wrong with that?
> 
> ...



Thats all well and good until Ben Gurion started ordering people purged from their homes. Then it gets icky.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 25, 2008)

Reality said:


> Thats all well and good until Ben Gurion started ordering people purged from their homes. Then it gets icky.



The 'purge' was to eradicate the source of terrorist bombers who had killed and maimed Israeli citizens.  Had the Palestinians pointed out the terrorists, had chosen not to defend or hide them among themselves, there would have been no eradication of the source of the terrorism.

Was this overreaction or excessive?  Some think so.  Was there reasonable cause?  Many think so.  It is the same principle of the security wall declared "Apartheid" and worse by such ilk as Jimmy Carter and others.  But the Israelis were suffering daily bombing attempts, and more than a few successful attacks, before the wall went up.  Afterward, the bombings pretty well stopped.

Is it Apartheid to fence peaceful society off from those who are not peaceful (aka dangerous criminals) in this country?  No.  Nor is it Apartheid to fence off peaceful people from militant terrorists determined to destroy those peaceful people.

It's all a matter of perspective.  The Bible talks of rain falling on the just and unjust.  In matters of war, the reality of that metaphor is inevitable.

If the Palestinan leadership acknowledges Israel's right to exist, and does what it can reasonably do to apprehend and stop the terrorists, and agrees to be a good neighbor to Israel, there will be no more need for 'purges' or 'security walls' or any other measures Israel now employs to protect its people.  If the Palestinian does that and Israel does not reciprocate by becoming a good neighbor to the Palestinians, THEN my criticism will be strongly targeted at Israel.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Why shouldn't people be able to organize a nation for 'white folk' if you have enough 'white folk' who want that kind of environment?  I wouldn't want to live there, but what is wrong with the concept?  What rationale is there for anybody to not have the right to organize a country for a particular group so long as nobody's civil rights are violated in the process?
> 
> Japan's laws for citizenship, work permits, immigration laws, etc. etc. certainly favor those of Japanese ancestry.  I wouldn't want to live there either, but I don't have a problem with that.  What is wrong with that?
> 
> ...



I guess we could ask the ghost of Martin Luther King that question, fox.  WHITE people tried this shit back in the day.. how did that work out?  Are we a better nation because they failed or not?


SOUTH AFRICANS for that matter thought the very same thing you did.  Well, WHITE ones at least.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Like i said.. WATCH the video.


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I guess we could ask the ghost of Martin Luther King that question, fox.  WHITE people tried this shit back in the day.. how did that work out?  Are we a better nation because they failed or not?
> 
> 
> SOUTH AFRICANS for that matter thought the very same thing you did.  Well, WHITE ones at least.



Try again Shogun.  There was my comment about 'civil rights' in there somewhere.  Did you overlook that?  Or are you intentionally being obtuse?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Intentionally?


----------



## Rhys (Jul 25, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> You're welcome.  It's pretty hard to accuse the Israelis of racism or guilty of ethnic cleansing when 20% of the population is made up of citizens of Arab ancestry with no Jewish connections of any kind.



Only if you expect perfection in your racist activities, which, death camps now being out of fashion, is hard to achieve.   To have shifted from a situation where a few hundred Jews went to Jerusalem to die to one where millions of the natives live miserably outside the borders of their own stolen country seems to me something Hitler would have been proud of.   Imagine the kindness of the Master Race - allowing some of the natives still to live in their own country!   Nobel Peace Prize stuff, surely?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Try again Shogun.  There was my comment about 'civil rights' in there somewhere.  Did you overlook that?  Or are you intentionally being obtuse?



CIVIL RIGHTS don't put premiums on a particular ethnicity.  Again, This is why I already posted the Law of Return before you decided to.  Now, feel free to tell me how the US should put a premium on importing white people in order to maintain a WHITE domination of our culture.  We can still allow other races to come here, of course, but as long as the state MAINTAINS WHITE DOMINANCE, right?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> CIVIL RIGHTS don't put premiums on a particular ethnicity.  Again, This is why I already posted the Law of Return before you decided to.  Now, feel free to tell me how the US should put a premium on importing white people in order to maintain a WHITE domination of our culture.  We can still allow other races to come here, of course, but as long as the state MAINTAINS WHITE DOMINANCE, right?



I do not IMO think being for Immigrants speaking our language and becoming part of our culture, In anyway equates with wanting white dominance.

Not saying you said that, Just telling you how I feel about it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Intentionally?



oh YOU are one to laugh...


Find anything else to lie about today?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I do not IMO think being for Immigrants speaking our language and becoming part of our culture, In anyway equates with wanting white dominance.
> 
> Not saying you said that, Just telling you how I feel about it.



I dont either.  That's Ravi's little logical tangent.


Language is a common cultural issue.  It's not a race based criteria.  How would you feel if the US actively imported white people from Europe in order to keep the upcoming Latino population from usurping white dominance?  Im just asking, not assuming your answer..


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> dude.. backtrack however you need to.  I used YOUR words.
> 
> Reread the post I was responding to.  I'm not interested in hearing about your supposed benevolence while you insist that isreal, somehow, is impervious to the lessons of history when we see one dominant group fucking another in the ass.  OF COURSE THE OCCUPATION IS RACIST.  Do you want a fucking cookie?  Im commenting on your excuses for segregated two state solutions.. which, ironically enough, you go on to rationalize below.
> 
> ...



Note: Sorry for the late response, this thread grows way too fast and shit gets lost.

1) Point was I never claimed "same footing" in terms of power, I was ASKING you if you were saying that the BPP and Thurmond were on the same page in terms of segregation, which seemed like the assumption you were making. Just forget about it.

2) There is no more evidence that the Israeli government would allow a real, equitable, and non-biased democracy than a 1967-borders two-state solution. Obviously what the Israeli government would like is to continue either continue occupation or grant them independence in the form of the "swiss cheese" state. Except, that the majority of Israelis also support a two state solution:

Poll: 70% of Israelis back 2-state pact, 63% oppose Golan pull-out - Haaretz - Israel News

(On the other hand, there's some other outrageous poll results about other issues) 

3) I'm not saying that any state should be based on ethnic variables. As the example I said before, any Slovak that so chooses can move to the Czech Republic, eventually become a citizen, and have all the corresponding equal rights of a Czech. It should be the same for these states. Nobody should be a second-class citizen anywhere. Or another case, Canada is kind of a good example of a 'one-state solution'. If Israel would behave towards Palestinians like the Canadian government behaves towards the Quebecois, then a one state solution would be totally viable. But if Canada was treating the Quebecois as second-class citizens, with a policy of installing English settlements and total natural resource control, then Quebec wouldn't be a RACIST nation for wanting to become an independent country. Same goes for Palestinians. For a people that are being occupied and oppressed, having an actual state to defend their rights (or at least a state they will not be oppressed in) is a viable option, and I don't understand how that INHERENTLY implies that it's a racist state. By your logic, then every state is inherently "segregationalist", and the fact that there is a border between the US and Mexico, for example, is a racist sham. 

5) As for evidence that most palestinians want their own state:

Middle East Transparent ? Poll: Majority of Palestinians now support two-state solution

Readings of Interest

And perhaps most importantly, from the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research:

http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2005/p17ejoint.html


The rest of your points were kind of strange and wild assumptions of my position, which I guess is reasonable if you still don't understand the difference between segregationalism and statehood. Segregationalism is what is happening NOW in Israel, not what would happen if there was an Independent Palestine. Segregationalism occurs WITHIN a state, in which two types of people are, by law, required to live separately or discriminate against each other. Like I said before, if an international border between Israel and Palestine would be 'segregationalism' according to you, then by the same token an international border (worse yet, a wall) between the US and Mexico is also 'segregationalist'.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I dont either.  That's Ravi's little logical tangent.
> 
> 
> Language is a common cultural issue.  It's not a race based criteria.   Im just asking, not assuming your answer..



Logical. Exactly.

Language is a common cultural issue. So is religion. Which is what the Israelis base a part of their immigration policy on NOW, since 1999, not ethnic background. 


> How would you feel if the US actively imported white people from Europe in order to keep the upcoming Latino population from usurping white dominance?



Such irony.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

*The rest of your points were kind of strange and wild assumptions of my position, which I guess is reasonable if you still don't understand the difference between segregationalism and statehood. Segregationalism is what is happening NOW in Israel, not what would happen if there was an Independent Palestine. Segregationalism occurs WITHIN a state, in which two types of people are, by law, required to live separately or discriminate against each other. Like I said before, if an international border between Israel and Palestine would be 'segregationalism' according to you, then by the same token an international border (worse yet, a wall) between the US and Mexico is also 'segregationalist'.*


I tell you what.. when you figure out how to put the Temple Mount inside a pali state then you get back to me.  Otherwise, the two state solutions dry up as soon as the thrid Temple of Solomon breaks ground.  You assume that palis, and muslims everywhere are just going to pack up and forget their heritage on that common land when teased with some bullshit hypothetical that would have happened already if it ever was going to.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

*Logical. Exactly.*

clearly, you are not picking up not he sarcasm.
*
Language is a common cultural issue. So is religion. Which is what the Israelis base a part of their immigration policy on NOW, since 1999, not ethnic background. 
*

RELIGION IS NOT THE MIDIGATING FACTOR IN BEING A FUCKING JEW OR ATHEIST JEWS WOULD NOT APPLY.  good fucking grief.  Ask Jill if it's her FAITH that makes her a fucking jew, ravi.  Get ONE motherfucker with hebrew heritage to support your goofy notion that it's a dogma that is the midigating variable

I'll wait.


*Such irony.*

By all means.. answer the fucking question.  We don't increase white demographics in order to minimize a growing non-white population.  If you can find evidence of such then, by all means, POST THAT SHIT.  Otherwise, take your snarky ass down the road.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Ask Jill if it's her FAITH that makes her a fucking jew, ravi.



She's not a fucking jew. She's a Jew. And as far as I know, she isn't an Israeli you flaming racist retard.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I dont either.  That's Ravi's little logical tangent.
> 
> 
> Language is a common cultural issue.  It's not a race based criteria.  How would you feel if the US actively imported white people from Europe in order to keep the upcoming Latino population from usurping white dominance?  Im just asking, not assuming your answer..



I believe we have at least in the past, done this very thing through immigration quotas, don't you?

Are you saying a nation and it's people do not have the right to set quotas on who immigrates to their country and from where?

You are aware that nearly every nation on earth does this right?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> She's not a fucking jew. She's a Jew. And as far as I know, she isn't an Israeli you flaming racist retard.



AGAIN, stupid, ASK HER IF ITS HER FUCKING FAITH THAT MAKES HER A JEW

Go ahead.. dont be ascerred..  She's not israeli and she doesn't observe the faith..  So, by all means.. ASK HER WHAT IT IS THAT MAKES HER JEWISH.

I promise, calling me a racist wont make you any less of a fucking ignorant ****.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Who says I don't observe my faith, moron? I'm more secular than not, but don't you dare tell me who's a jew.

And if you weren't such a jewhater, you wouldn't get called a racist.

oh yeah, i forgot, it's mexicans, too. guess i'm not alone.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I believe we have at least in the past, done this very thing through immigration quotas, don't you?
> 
> Are you saying a nation and it's people do not have the right to set quotas on who immigrates to their country and from where?
> 
> You are aware that nearly every nation on earth does this right?



AND who is defending those past quotes?  Certainly not me.  We also used to allow slaves.  What is that supposed to say about our current policy?
*
Im saying that those quotas are not ethnically set  in order to maintain the rule of a particular demographic.*  Again, if white gentiles decided to enact a law of return to keep latinos, blacks, asian and JEWS from collectively outnumbering their political power how quickly would you accept it?


What western nation determines quotas in order to protect the dominance of white people, chuck?  It sure as hell isn't the US.  


Unless you can provide evidence otherwise..


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> AGAIN, stupid, ASK HER IF ITS HER FUCKING FAITH THAT MAKES HER A JEW
> 
> Go ahead.. dont be ascerred..  She's not israeli and she doesn't observe the faith..  So, by all means.. ASK HER WHAT IT IS THAT MAKES HER JEWISH.
> 
> I promise, calling me a racist wont make you any less of a fucking ignorant ****.



calling Ravi and Jillian Ignorant childish name will not make you any less ignorant and Childish.

Really ****? You are better than that arn't you.



> Language Guidelines:
> Foul language (profanity) used in USmessageboard.com will be loosely tolerated and at the moderators discretion. *Derogatory statements directed at other members as well as direct or indirect personal attacks are permitted with the stipulation that you generally look like a fool when resorting to these tactics within a serious conversation on real issues. If you're comfortable playing the fool, feel free to do so.*


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> What western nation determines quotas in order to protect the dominance of white people, chuck?  It sure as hell isn't the US.




many, especially in Europe. Switzerland comes to mind. I suggest you read up on their immigration laws. Instead of just railing against Israel.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Who says I don't observe my faith, moron? I'm more secular than not, but don't you dare tell me who's a jew.
> 
> And if you weren't such a jewhater, you wouldn't get called a racist.
> 
> oh yeah, i forgot, it's mexicans, too. guess i'm not alone.



Bitch, i've seen you admit that you don't observe the jewish faith MANY times before.. Many, MANY times before.  But hey, NOW you are a fucking practicing member of the flocki as long as yuo get to wield your mighty Scarlet A, eh?


THATS fucking hilarious.

Now that you've crept up from under your rock after the NBC nightly news videos i've posted why dont you tell both Ravi and myself if it's your FAITH or ETHNICITY that allows you identify with the jews.  Or dont, you disingenuous bitch.  It's no skin off of MY yarmulke.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> many, especially in Europe. Switzerland comes to mind. I suggest you read up on their immigration laws. Instead of just railing against Israel.



im not much on non sequiters, chuck.. im afraid your going to have to provide evidenc that the swiss puts a premium on white people.


and, dude.. feel free not to avoid my other questions about the US putting it's own law of return in place in order to make sure WHITE GOYIM wont lose their dominance.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> calling Ravi and Jillian Ignorant childish name will not make you any less ignorant and Childish.
> 
> Really ****? You are better than that arn't you.



spare me the lecture and admit that you would cry like a fucking siren if white people had a Law of Return in the US.  I give what I get.  If they both want to be name calling motherfuckers we can all be name calling motherfuckers.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Come on JILL.. Tell me all about your FAITH IN THE HEBREW RELIGION...  TELL ME ALL ABOUT HOW THAT IS WHAT makes you jewish AND NOT YOUR FUCKING ETHNICITY.  It's cool, you can even toss out a few spiteful Scarlet A's while admitting to Ravi that it's not MERELY faith that makes you a jew.  Here kitty kitty kitty..   come on snukums..  You can DO EET.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

And you too, Chuck.. Feel free to dive right on into how you'd shrug off WHITE GOYIM using the state to make sure minority groups never usurp their choke hold on this culture.. Care to see some Olmert quotes conveying the same damn thing about about the result of a failure of a two state solution where Israel ACTUALLY HAS TO allow equality over an ETHNIC standard?  

Your call, Tex.. After you get done with the schreiking reproach regarding the tenor of my tone feel free to remind me why the SWISS were THOROUGHLY chastised for their attempt at racial standards for immigration..


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> AGAIN, stupid, ASK HER IF ITS HER FUCKING FAITH THAT MAKES HER A JEW
> 
> Go ahead.. dont be ascerred..  She's not israeli and she doesn't observe the faith..  So, by all means.. ASK HER WHAT IT IS THAT MAKES HER JEWISH.
> 
> I promise, calling me a racist wont make you any less of a fucking ignorant ****.



Damn, you are totally whacked. We have been talking about what makes one an Israeli, not what makes one a Jew. 

Pathetic, seriously and totally pathetic.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I am part jewish, and a dual citizen of both the US and Israel. I refrain from posting on Israel related issues because people will just assume bias.



how many times have you posted here?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> how many times have you posted here?



Did you come up with that one all on your own Bobo?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Damn, you are totally whacked. We have been talking about what makes one an Israeli, not what makes one a Jew.
> 
> Pathetic, seriously and totally pathetic.



Scroll up, brainiac.  We've been discussing what criteria qualifies a person to recieve consideration under the LAW OF RETURN... Not merely who is israeli.  Once again you try to LIE your way out of feeling like a fucking idiot.  Shall i repost your quote again?


*
 Jew
    One who adheres to Judaism or is of Jewish lineage. See Judaism. *
Glossary: J

*Who is a Jew?

A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do. A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox.*
Judaism 101: Who Is a Jew?


myawwwwwwww... whoooossee a sad little cloooown now...


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Come on JILL.. Tell me all about your FAITH IN THE HEBREW RELIGION...  TELL ME ALL ABOUT HOW THAT IS WHAT makes you jewish AND NOT YOUR FUCKING ETHNICITY.  It's cool, you can even toss out a few spiteful Scarlet A's while admitting to Ravi that it's not MERELY faith that makes you a jew.  Here kitty kitty kitty..   come on snukums..  You can DO EET.




Why would I?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Why would I?



indeed, given that admitting as much would prove my fucking point, WHY WOULD you.

calling me a joo hating racist sure does relive any necessity to be honest..  thats for GODDAMN sure.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> indeed, given that admitting as much would prove my fucking point, WHY WOULD you.
> 
> calling me a joo hating racist sure does relive any necessity to be honest..  thats for GODDAMN sure.



Why on earth would I try to have a sensible conversation about faith with someone whose proven he has no interest in it?

You must think everyone but you is stupid...

Newsflash... it isn't so.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Did you come up with that one all on your own Bobo?



WHY are you avoiding my question about a goyim LAw of Return that facilitates white dominance in the US, Chuck?


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> WHY are you avoiding my question about a goyim LAw of Return that facilitates white dominance in the US, Chuck?



I have a better question... why do you insist on a one-state solution when Abbas is for a two-state solution?

Ooooh...oooh... I know the answer!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


>



What part of this don't you understand?

*A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew,

*If they convert, they are considered a Jew. Even if they started out an Irish Lassie you jerk.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Why on earth would I try to have a sensible conversation about faith with someone whose proven he has no interest in it?
> 
> You must think everyone but you is stupid...
> 
> Newsflash... it isn't so.



Like I've said.. we can BOTH talk shit jill.  You are no more interested in having a conversation where you don't use the Scarlet A like a fucking octopus uses ink than you are being honest about the ethnic requirement of your heritage.

Indeed, your ducking and weaving makes your input stupid, jill.  I can respect those who return the favor.  Thus far, in every goddamn thread where your blessed fucking homeland might see some dirt you've proven your capacity to fall short every goddamn time you toss out the Scarlet A.  Hell, for that matter, why don't you go ahead and insist that I just want to see dead jews like you did the last time I had you in a corner.  Who needs quotes when accusations and crying martyr works, eh?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Why would I?


Why should you indeed, he's a moron.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I tell you what.. when you figure out how to put the Temple Mount inside a pali state then you get back to me.  Otherwise, the two state solutions dry up as soon as the thrid Temple of Solomon breaks ground.  You assume that palis, and muslims everywhere are just going to pack up and forget their heritage on that common land when teased with some bullshit hypothetical that would have happened already if it ever was going to.



What's the Third Temple of Solomon?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> I have a better question... why do you insist on a one-state solution when Abbas is for a two-state solution?
> 
> Ooooh...oooh... I know the answer!




HAHAHA!

and you JUST cried about the standard of this conversation?  





I argue for a single state solution for the same reason every other western nation with plural cultures have one: BECAUSE WE ARE NOT THE FUCKING RACISTS WHO THINK THEIR SHIT DONT STINK.

now, by all mean.. tell me all about how I want to steep my morning tea with the fetus of dead jews..  Dont forget to cry about the nature of this conversation either.  THAT wont be ironic as fuck.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> What part of this don't you understand?
> 
> *A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew,
> 
> *If they convert, they are considered a Jew. Even if they started out an Irish Lassie you jerk.




snipping out the portion that you think works for you won't acutally make you look any less stupid, ravi.  I posted my evidence and thats clearly not what the standard is.  

But, you are ravi so go figure.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Why should you indeed, he's a moron.



And you are a scheisty fucking liar riding on the coattails of this conversation like a tick on a dogs nuts.


Again.. I've posted MY evidence.. feel free to sit there and ponder why exactly jill wont answer the question regarding an ethnic standard of being jewish..


----------



## editec (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Ask Jill if it's her FAITH that makes her a fucking jew, ravi. .


 
How rude.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Epsilon Delta said:


> What's the Third Temple of Solomon?



google it.  Specifically, find out where it's supposed to be built and whats already there.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

sigh

Fine, you go right ahead and pretend that there is some ethnic component that the Israelis insist on for citizenship. I'm sure the Pals appreciate your tireless efforts on their behalf.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

editec said:


> How rude.



im a rude motherfucker.  Now, would you like to hop into this or just sit there on the sidelines?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> sigh
> 
> Fine, you go right ahead and pretend that there is some ethnic component that the Israelis insist on for citizenship. I'm sure the Pals appreciate your tireless efforts on their behalf.



Feel free to email the JEWISH VIRTUAL LIBRARY and tell them how wrong they are about the ethic requirement.  Again, THIS is about the LAW OF RETURN, you scheisty bitch.  I KNOW the zionists appreciate your ignorance.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Come on Jilly Jilly Jilly.. Come get some MILK.  Tell Ravi just how much of the Hebrew faith you observe and how THAT is why you are considered jewish.  I mean, SHING CHOW down the hall only has to don the cap, recite a few words, cut some skin off his dick and then WALLAH he's jewish, right JILL?  Herrre kitty kitty kitty!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

And you, CHUCK, are a fucking disappointment.  If you can't step up the the plate, fella, I expect you to stop swinging the bat.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

editec said:


> How rude.



ya think?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

It is important to note that being a Jew* has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do.* A *person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew*, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, *and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox.*

:whistle:


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> ya think?



dont cry for me argentina.. answer the fucking question.  I've seen you act just as rude to LOTS of people.  Being all self righteous all of a sudden is a joke and a half.



come on JILL.  tell me what makes you jewish.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

So let me get this straight, it was okay for a bunch of muslims to put a mosque over the Holy of Holies, because they were conquerers, but when they attacked and got their butts beaten, the Jews are supposed to leave the mosque on our holiest site and then give them the land they lost back?

okie dokie....


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

HEEEEEEERE jilly jilly jilly jilly... come on punkin.. show this beg bad MEANY how wrong he is and tell him that it's FAITH that makes you jewish..   Sould I get the dangle string or the laser pointer, kittums?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> It is important to note that being a Jew* has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do.* A *person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew*, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, *and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox.*
> 
> :whistle:



Yep. Anyone that converts is eligible to apply for citizen in this religious country. And anyone born to a Jew is eligible unless they practice another religion.

Just like I'm an American because my parents are and I have not practiced another nationality, so to speak.

There is nothing racist about this whatsoever.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> WHY are you avoiding my question about a goyim LAw of Return that facilitates white dominance in the US, Chuck?



I am not avoiding it bud, I simply do not agree with you. Did you ever go read about Switzerland's Immigration laws?

The very Idea that Israel is the only nation that restricts Immigration based on ethnicity is false. As I said, nearly every nation on earth does this in some way or another.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> So let me get this straight, it was okay for a bunch of muslims to put a mosque over the Holy of Holies, because they were conquerers, but when they attacked and got their butts beaten, the Jews are supposed to leave the mosque on our holiest site and then give them the land they lost back?
> 
> okie dokie....



JUST LIKE we wont be tearing up the Washington Memorial for the sake of whatever was there in some ancient backlogue of history..  indeed.  You'll leave Temple mount alone or you WILL see how short the future of isreal will be.  THIS is why we both know a two state solution that evicts muslims from israel wont work.  



But hey.. don't deflect here, Jill..  Since IM the ignorant one, apparently, why dont you take this opportunity to school my meany goyim ass and tell me WHAT MAKES YOU JEWISH: your FAITH or your ETHNICITY.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yep. Anyone that converts is eligible to apply for citizen in this religious country. And anyone born to a Jew is eligible unless they practice another religion.
> 
> Just like I'm an American because my parents are and I have not practiced another nationality, so to speak.
> 
> There is nothing racist about this whatsoever.



I think they're eligible EVEN if they practice another religion because the Germans didn't care that jews practiced other religions. They went to how much jewish "blood" you had. But to be fair, I'm not sure of that.

And THAT'S why Shogie's having such problems. there are multiple ways of figuring out who's a jew for citizenship purposes, as far as I know.

I'd also point out that Israel was the only country to take in Darfur refugees, and the Ethiopian Falashas.

But it's white supremacy, I'm sure....


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I am not avoiding it bud, I simply do not agree with you. Did you ever go read about Switzerland's Immigration laws?
> 
> The very Idea that Israel is the only nation that restricts Immigration based on ethnicity is false. As I said, nearly every nation on earth does this in some way or another.



I did.  And the swiss got it's ass handed to them for OBVIOUSLY racist standards.  The policy is no more and your example falls on its face.

Now, tell me how youd react to a WHITE LAW OF RETURN IN THE US.

Slavery in africa doesn't validate slavery in the US, dude.  Deflecting the racist element to a state policy of isreal is not going to be washed away like pilates hands just because YOU dont want to admit that youd scream to high fucking heaven if WHITE PEOPLE had the same goddamn policy here.


Which,  I have to say, is pretty fucking obvious why you duck and weave just like ole jill.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yep. Anyone that converts is eligible to apply for citizen in this religious country. And anyone born to a Jew is eligible unless they practice another religion.
> 
> Just like I'm an American because my parents are and I have not practiced another nationality, so to speak.
> 
> There is nothing racist about this whatsoever.




you are still stupid, ravi.  Converts are not eligible for the LAW OF RETURN.  You are out of your fucking element here.  If you were smart enough to tie your own shoe youd wonder why Jill wont admit that you are totally fucking wrong about the criteria involved with being considered a jew.


it's cool.. begone ya pesky lil gnat.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> I think they're eligible EVEN if they practice another religion because the Germans didn't care that jews practiced other religions. They went to how much jewish "blood" you had. But to be fair, I'm not sure of that.
> 
> And THAT'S why Shogie's having such problems. there are multiple ways of figuring out who's a jew for citizenship purposes, as far as I know.
> 
> ...



Shog's a little slow on the uptake. Or maybe he really is a racist, it's hard to tell.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> you are still stupid, ravi.  Converts are not eligible for the LAW OF RETURN.  You are out of your fucking element here.  If you were smart enough to tie your own shoe youd wonder why Jill wont admit that you are totally fucking wrong about the criteria involved with being considered a jew.
> 
> 
> it's cool.. begone ya pesky lil gnat.



That's absolutely untrue... absolutely. You really need to take off the hate goggles or stop intentionally misstating. Either way, you don't know what you're talking about.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> I think they're eligible EVEN if they practice another religion because the Germans didn't care that jews practiced other religions. They went to how much jewish "blood" you had. But to be fair, I'm not sure of that.
> 
> And THAT'S why Shogie's having such problems. there are multiple ways of figuring out who's a jew for citizenship purposes, as far as I know.
> 
> ...



HA!

yea.. etheopians.. WHO ARE CONSIDERED JEWISH!



Israel's Law of Return (1950) *allows Jews and those with Jewish parents or grandparents,* and spouses of the aforementioned, to settle in Israel and gain citizenship.

Beta Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Come on JILL... NAME THOSE CRITERIA.

ISREAL didn't take on JUST ANY fucking etheopian!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> That's absolutely untrue... absolutely. You really need to take off the hate goggles or stop intentionally misstating. Either way, you don't know what you're talking about.



Well then PROVE ME WRONG, JILL!




SHOW ME HOW I AM MISTAKEN.  HERE IS MY CHIN, TAKE YOUR BEST FUCKING SHOT!


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Shog's a little slow on the uptake. Or maybe he really is a racist, it's hard to tell.



Actually, I just checked. Someone who voluntarily practices another religion isn't a jew for citizenship purposes. 

I stand corrected. Sorry.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> That's absolutely untrue... absolutely. You really need to take off the hate goggles or stop intentionally misstating. Either way, you don't know what you're talking about.


He can't seem to understand that a Jew can be used as an ethnic label and a religious label. I honestly don't know if he's just stupid or blinded by his own bias.

Maybe he thinks if an Irish person coverts they have to have semitic dna implanted in them to make them "really" Jewish.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Actually, I just checked. Someone who voluntarily practices another religion isn't a jew for citizenship purposes.
> 
> I stand corrected. Sorry.



What about atheists, JILL?  whats the rule on people who simply don't BELIEVE?  WHAT MAKES THOSE PEOPLE JEWISH?


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Well then PROVE ME WRONG, JILL!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Law of Return - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

your google finger broken?

note... differences between orthodox, conservative and reform conversion.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> He can't seem to understand that a Jew can be used as an ethnic label and a religious label. I honestly don't know if he's just stupid or blinded by his own bias.
> 
> Maybe he thinks if an Irish person coverts they have to have semitic dna implanted in them to make them "really" Jewish.



Hey, i've posted MY evidence, stupid.  REad it or don't.  Jill has yet to post shit just like you.  I realize all it takes to prove something to you is a pom pom but, and let me enjoy the richness of this lil net moment, JILL IS TRYING REAL HARD NOT TO ADMIT TO YOU EXACTLY WHAT YOU DONT THINK IS TRUE.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Law of Return - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> your google finger broken?
> 
> note... differences between orthodox, conservative and reform conversion.


*
Eligibility requirements*

Those who are eligible to immigrate under the Law of Return are immediately granted citizenship. Controversy has arisen as to whether all those claiming citizenship rights under the Law of Return should be registered as "Jewish" citizens for census purposes. *Jewish status is traditionally granted according to the halakhic definition of being Jewish-- if your mother is Jewish*, you are Jewish as well or if you convert to Judaism (*though conversions to Reform and Conservative Judaism streams are generally not recognized by many people in Israel*).


YOUR link, jill....



come on, JILL.. SURELY you can school this goyim motherfucker better than THAT!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Originally, *the Law of Return was restricted to Jews only*. A 1970 amendment, however, stated that, "*The rights of a Jew under this Law* and the rights of an oleh under the Nationality Law...*are also vested in a child and a grandchild of a Jew,* *the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew"* (Law of Return).



LOL


SAME link, Jill!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

*The demographic explanation*

A second explanation is that in order to increase immigration levels so as *to offset the "demographic threat" posed by the continuing presence and growth of the Palestinian population, the law expanded the base group of those eligible to immigrate to Israel.[*2]


Again, YOUR link...


say, JILL.. What would you say if the fucking WHITE DEVIL of the US decided to do the exact same thing for the EXACT same purpose?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

*Controversy*

*Critics claim that the Law of Return runs counter to the claims of a democratic state.*[8][9] [10]

Critique of the Law of Return by Palestinians and advocates for Palestinian refugees is often linked to the Palestinian demand for a right of return.[11] The Law of Return, as contrasted against the right of return, is cited by Palestinians and their supporters *as a deep offense that amounts to asking them to accept what they see as institutionalized ethnic discrimination that privileges the rights of Jews*.[1


SAME LINK...


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> He can't seem to understand that a Jew can be used as an ethnic label and a religious label. I honestly don't know if he's just stupid or blinded by his own bias.
> 
> Maybe he thinks if an Irish person coverts they have to have semitic dna implanted in them to make them "really" Jewish.



Know what he really hates? That Jews have a safe place.

He must think that really sucks.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> *Controversy*
> 
> *Critics claim that the Law of Return runs counter to the claims of a democratic state.*[8][9] [10]
> 
> ...



Yawn...

come on snookie bear, why do you want a one-state solution when Mahmood Abbas wants a two-state solution?

Surely you couldn't have the welfare of the palestinians at heart more than he does.

Or is it that he justs wants a country and you want dead and subjugated jews.

You keep asking about what I am...why won't you tell us what you are?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Know what he really hates? That Jews have a safe place.
> 
> He must think that really sucks.



THAT is about as profound as claiming that i want to see dead jews, punkin...


your "safe place" is not a haven for racism.


poor girl..   Was I a bit HARD on you today by asking you to admit that it's not your faith that makes you jewish???   myawwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Hell, JEWS have a safe place in the US too.  I dont care one bit about that as long as there is no state sanctioned LAW OF RETURN here in the US...  



I've been whupping your ass left and right lately, eh jill?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Know what he really hates? That Jews have a safe place.
> 
> He must think that really sucks.



That could be true. I'm not sure.

But he keeps posting these bits of information that he thinks prove his ethnic requirement. Because when he reads the word _Jew_, he sees it as _Semite_ (this is a little simplistic, I know) instead of as a label of religion (like Christian, Mulsim, etc.).

I'm not even sure why he'd think a convert to Judaism would be excluded from living in Israel. That'd kind of nullify the entire purpose of conversion. Like the pope telling YOU if you converted to Catholicism that you'd be eligible for all the bennies but you couldn't visit the Vatican.

lol

Maybe he just doesn't really understand what religion is...


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 25, 2008)

And why does she always yawn when she's caught looking really stupid? 

Perhaps lack of oxygen.....it would explain both.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Yawn...
> come on snookie bear, why do you want a one-state solution when Mahmood Abbas wants a two-state solution?
> Surely you couldn't have the welfare of the palestinians at heart more than he does.
> Or is it that he justs wants a country and you want dead and subjugated jews.
> You keep asking about what I am...why won't you tell us what you are?





As i've repeatedly stated, despite your claims that I just want to see dead jews, IM not interested in making excuses for a RACIST STATE STANDARD...  Not for Aryians.. not for WHITEY.. and not for your little club.

And yes, given that he is a puppet of zionism hoping to APPEASE your racism I do have the welfare of the palis at heart.  CLEARLY you only have the welfare of a CHOSEN race at heart though.  

poor girly...   falling for the same bullshit that caused Wallace to stand at the steps of a college works for you, perhaps, but not for people who believe in EQUALITY.  


And no, I KNOW you are jewish.  Just like I KNOW that it's not your faith that makes that so.  Now go ahead... call me names.. your equivilent to ****** LOVER is not lost on me, jilly bean..


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> And why does she always yawn when she's caught looking really stupid?
> 
> Perhaps lack of oxygen.....it would explain both.



oh it's fuckin REAL CLEAR why she's been dodging left and right for the last 3 pages.  The bottom line is that, between she and I, ONE OF US won't accept racism as long as it benefits our personal ethnicity.  We don't make excuses for a WHITE America and it's a goddamn joke that Jill, who otherwise pretends to be a humanitarian lefty, would make the same excuses for racism that we saw in German boycotts of jews and White Jim Crow laws.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Let me see if I understand you Shog, You want Israel to end its requirements for immigration and allow Muslims to flood into the country, While they sit surrounded by Muslim countries who themselves limit Immigration, to mainly Arabs and Muslims, and in fact often persecute and or kill people for daring to not be Muslim when in their nations?

Forgive me if I fail to grasp the logic of that.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

AllieBaba said:


> And why does she always yawn when she's caught looking really stupid?
> 
> Perhaps lack of oxygen.....it would explain both.



Projecting again, AllieBaby?

Although the irony of you calling others stupid is really sweet.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> That could be true. I'm not sure.
> But he keeps posting these bits of information that he thinks prove his ethnic requirement. Because when he reads the word _Jew_, he sees it as _Semite_ (this is a little simplistic, I know) instead of as a label of religion (like Christian, Mulsim, etc.).
> I'm not even sure why he'd think a convert to Judaism would be excluded from living in Israel. That'd kind of nullify the entire purpose of conversion. Like the pope telling YOU if you converted to Catholicism that you'd be eligible for all the bennies but you couldn't visit the Vatican.
> lol
> Maybe he just doesn't really understand what religion is...





Hey, YOU are the one looking stupid now that it's clear that your little hero won't admit the ethnic standard of her jewishness.  Ive neveer said a CONVERT would be excluded from living in israel.. THIS is about the LAW OF RETURN, once again..  But hey, you are nothing but a scheisty fucking liar so what more should one expect from your input.


I've posted MY evidence that clarifies just how JEWISH a converted Asian would be considered.  Regardless if he is allowed to live in israel, HE is still not a jew.  Jillian knows this and her total avoidance and laughable wiki link, which i've thoroughly decimated with quotes, shows this.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> Projecting again, AllieBaby?
> 
> Although the irony of you calling others stupid is really sweet.



The shit talking is cheap, Jill.. We can all do that.. Why don't you go ahead and take another swing at the chin of this pesky fucking goyim???  


or, just follow suit and call me a jooooooo hating antisemite!  THAT IS YOUR STANDARD, is it not?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Hey, YOU are the one looking stupid now that it's clear that your little hero won't admit the ethnic standard of her jewishness.  Ive neveer said a CONVERT would be excluded from living in israel.. THIS is about the LAW OF RETURN, once again..  But hey, you are nothing but a scheisty fucking liar so what more should one expect from your input.
> 
> 
> I've posted MY evidence that clarifies just how JEWISH a converted Asian would be considered.  Regardless if he is allowed to live in israel, HE is still not a jew.  Jillian knows this and her total avoidance and laughable wiki link, which i've thoroughly decimated with quotes, shows this.



Not one of your links said a convert to Judaism is not a Jew. Not one. The ultra-conservative branch might believe that, but they believe that in the US as well. Just like different factions of Christianity don't always consider other branches to be Christians.

It's amazing that you have so much hatred for something that you don't understand. I really think you are just stupid, but then again, isn't that why most racists are racists?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Let me see if I understand you Shog, You want Israel to end its requirements for immigration and allow Muslims to flood into the country, While they sit surrounded by Muslim countries who themselves limit Immigration, to mainly Arabs and Muslims, and in fact often persecute and or kill people for daring to not be Muslim when in their nations?
> 
> Forgive me if I fail to grasp the logic of that.




Yes.  That is exactly it.  Not to kill jews or to persicute anyone.  The nation of Israel is a place of law REGARDLESS of the ethnicity in power.  THE US DOESNT NEED A FUCKING WHITE MAN TO PRESERVE THE BILL OF RIGHTS any more than Israel needs a jew to preserve the safety of both peoples.


FUCK, dude.. if anything, MAKING AN EXAMPLE out of a plural israel would give muslims in the area something to reflect on BESIDES BEING KICKED THE FUCK OUT FOR THE SAKE OF ZION.  It's exactly what we did with upset blacks during the civil rights era. We didn't eject them and expect them to just deal iwth it.  WE assimilated them into our culture and empowered their identity as AMERICANS.


Now, grasp it or not, avoid my stinging questions if you must...  But you konw goddamn well you would not tolerate the same kind of ethnic standard set in place to preserve white authority here and it's nothing but racist hypocracy that keeps you making excuses for Isreal doing it.


Again, APPARENTLY 10% of the fucking Knesset is ARAB.  Don't tell me it CANT work.  Dont TELL ME that muslims have nothing better to do that kill jews.  You are acting like a fucking plantation owner in the south facing freed slaves.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Not one of your links said a convert to Judaism is not a Jew. Not one. The ultra-conservative branch might believe that, but they believe that in the US as well. Just like different factions of Christianity don't always consider other branches to be Christians.
> 
> It's amazing that you have so much hatred for something that you don't understand. I really think you are just stupid, but then again, isn't that why most racists are racists?



Yes, as a matter of FACT, both did.  Shall I repost them?  Shall I BOLD them again?  Do you need to see fucking fireworks and some Fanfare music to drag your attention away from looking for something to lie about, ya scheisty lying hooker?


Trust me, given Jills avoidance here YOU might wanna lay off the whole "you dont understand" shit before you finally figure out that this is another topic that you will eventually be having to make another lie about..


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Yes.  That is exactly it.  Not to kill jews or to persicute anyone.  The nation of Israel is a place of law REGARDLESS of the ethnicity in power.  THE US DOESNT NEED A FUCKING WHITE MAN TO PRESERVE THE BILL OF RIGHTS any more than Israel needs a jew to preserve the safety of both peoples.
> 
> 
> FUCK, dude.. if anything, MAKING AN EXAMPLE out of a plural israel would give muslims in the area something to reflect on BESIDES BEING KICKED THE FUCK OUT FOR THE SAKE OF ZION.  It's exactly what we did with upset blacks during the civil rights era. We didn't eject them and expect them to just deal iwth it.  WE assimilated them into our culture and empowered their identity as AMERICANS.
> ...




Forgive me If I think that example would be lost on must Muslim Nations governments. Governments who regularly jail and kill people for being anything but Muslim.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Yes, as a matter of FACT, both did.  Shall I repost them?  Shall I BOLD them again?  Do you need to see fucking fireworks and some Fanfare music to drag your attention away from looking for something to lie about, ya scheisty lying hooker?
> 
> 
> Trust me, given Jills avoidance here YOU might wanna lay off the whole "you dont understand" shit before you finally figure out that this is another topic that you will eventually be having to make another lie about..


Yes, please do because I've read them several times. When you post them again, actually try reading them for comprehension. Because you are not comprehending what your C&P's are stating.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Forgive me If I think that example would be lost on must Muslim Nations governments. Governments who regularly jail and kill people for being anything but Muslim.



Why?  Because they are slow witted and love chicken and watermelon?  Because they are LAZY and cant swim?  I dont generalize muslims like I dont generalize jews to be sneaky, big nosed, cheap bastards.  Why dont you go ahead and take a step towards shedding the racist bullshit.  You don't make a population love you by marginalizing them.  If so, WHY DONT 10% of the fucking KNESSET get busy blowing up motherfucking jews?  


And, dude... as far as jailing and killing goes, you can take a gander at the NBC nightly news video I posted today.  They have their points of valid arguement just like you do.  By solidifying both peoples you take away the reasons to hate.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Yes, please do because I've read them several times. When you post them again, actually try reading them for comprehension. Because you are not comprehending what your C&P's are stating.



Fair enough.. NOTICE THE BOLD


* Jew*
    One who adheres to Judaism *or is of Jewish lineage*. See Judaism. 
*JEWISH VIRTUAL LIBRARY*
Glossary: J


* Who Is a Jew?*

*It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do.* A *person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox. In this sense, Judaism is more like a nationality than like other religions, and being Jewish is like a citizenship.* See What Is Judaism?
*JEWFAQ.ORG*
Judaism 101: Who Is a Jew?


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Why?  Because they are slow witted and love chicken and watermelon?  Because they are LAZY and cant swim?  I dont generalize muslims like I dont generalize jews to be sneaky, big nosed, cheap bastards.  Why dont you go ahead and take a step towards shedding the racist bullshit.  You don't make a population love you by marginalizing them.  If so, WHY DONT 10% of the fucking KNESSET get busy blowing up motherfucking jews? .



No because those Muslims nations governments have been pretty consistent in their persecution of there own minority religions, and because I do not think they put much stock in what Israel says or Does.

calling me racist because I feel this way about nations Governments(NOT THEIR PEOPLE) is completely baseless, and frankly just rude.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> No because those Muslims nations governments have been pretty consistent in their persecution of there own minority religions, and because I do not think they put much stock in what Israel says or Does.
> 
> calling me racist because I feel this way about nations Governments(NOT THEIR PEOPLE) is completely baseless, and frankly just rude.



AND, those muslim nations are not reflective of the legal protections that are found in israel.  Get a Bill of Rights like we have.  Apply it equally.  I don't fear a muslim majority any more than I do the christian one we have now AS LONG AS COMMON EQUAL RIGHTS ARE PRESERVED.  Iran would have nothing to say about the liberties in israel.  If ANYTHING, hostility against what they see as backsliding muslims would be met, just like that 10% of the Knesset proves, with resistance of both ethnicities.  

but Hey, again, IM not generalizing a whole population based on the actions of a sample.  Youll have to forgive me for believing in common humanity despite cultural influence.  


did you ever want to tell me how youd feel about a Caucasian Law of Return for the US?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

_It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do. A person born to non-Jewish parents *who has not undergone the formal process of conversion* but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew,_--

This means that someone that hasn't converted to Judaism is not a Jew, even if they believe everything Jews believe. Just like anyone that hasn't converted to Catholicism is not a Catholic, even if they believe everything a Catholic believes.

  <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--><o></o>
  [FONT=&quot]_even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox_. - 

This means, once a Jew, always a Jew, unless you practice another religion. They apparently do not share your belief that atheism is a religion. This is not much different than how lapsed Catholics are still Catholics unless they convert to another religion or otherwise renounce their religion.

_In this sense, Judaism is more like a nationality than like other religions, and being Jewish is like a citizenship.

_So if a Muslim woman converts to Judaism, all her children are Jews (unless they convert to another religion), even if she later becomes an atheist.


[/FONT]


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

you are wrong.. plain and simple.  Trying to wrap what the JEWISH VIRTUAL LIBRARY AND JEWFAQ has to say about it around your goofy lil ignorant opinon means very little.


nice cut and paste job too, ravikins.. I like how you decided to cut out the parts that put egg on your face.

Again.  Pester the fuck out of Jill to admit what makes her jewish.  Go tug on Chuckys leg until he finally answers.  I dont care if you are too stupid to know better.  You ARE, after all, ravi.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> did you ever want to tell me how youd feel about a Caucasian Law of Return for the US?



Law of return from where? There is a reason Israel calls it a Law of Return, because Right or Wrong they feel those people are returning to there rightful land. So would I support a Caucasian Law of return in the US, of course not, because America is in no way the traditional homeland of White people now is it. On the other hand I do indeed feel that the area of Israel is the traditional home land of Jews, and frankly the only home land they have ever had.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

A *person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox.*


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> you are wrong.. plain and simple.  Trying to wrap what the JEWISH VIRTUAL LIBRARY AND JEWFAQ has to say about it around your goofy lil ignorant opinon means very little.
> 
> 
> nice cut and paste job too, ravikins.. I like how you decided to cut out the parts that put egg on your face.
> ...



I didn't cut out anything but this:


* Jew*
    One who adheres to Judaism *or is of Jewish lineage*. See Judaism. 

Which was pretty stupid of me because it states in a nutshell that you are wrong. A Jew is one who adheres to Judaism (practices the faith) or is of Jewish lineage (has a mother that is Jewish).

But from your response I know you didn't even read my previous post, so I'm done with you.

Time will tell if you are stupid or a racist. I've been leaning toward stupid but you might surprise me and be both.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Law of return from where? There is a reason Israel calls it a Law of Return, because Right or Wrong they feel those people are returning to there rightful land. So would I support a Caucasian Law of return in the US, of course not, because America is in no way the traditional homeland of White people now is it. On the other hand I do indeed feel that the area of Israel is the traditional home land of Jews, and frankly the only home land they have ever had.



RIGHT OR WRONG the germans felt the same way when purging germany.  Dont rationalize racism dude.  Dont give me an excuse.  ARYANS had a similar arguement about THEIR motherland.

no, of COURSE you wouldnt.  But yes, AMERICA is traditionally a white nation.  Name the jew that signed the Declaration of Independence.  Weather or not you FEEL that the land is rightfully the homeland of the jews does not erase the FACT that it's the same damn homeland of the muslims too.

And, give me a break..  Jews are found in a plethora of nations from Iran to the US.  Jews have homelands.  Regardless, so too should the Palis.  And if you cant fathom WHITE people taking a state sanctioned effort in preserving THEIR white culture then spare me if I dont weep any tears for jews doing the same thing in israel.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I didn't cut out anything but this:
> 
> 
> * Jew
> ...





HA!

yea.. clearly you know what LINEAGE means!




yea, i guess you do need to be done here given the handprint on your face.


trust me, i give a fuck what you think of me, ravi.  Truly.  It's like the axis of my entire world.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> no, of COURSE you wouldnt.  But yes, AMERICA is traditionally a white nation.  Name the jew that signed the Declaration of Independence.  Weather or not you FEEL that the land is rightfully the homeland of the jews does not erase the FACT that it's the same damn homeland of the muslims too.



I think the native Americans would disagree with you on that one bud.

And Muslims have many nations to call their homeland, while Jews have only one.

Ok feel free to call me a racist again, I am used to it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 25, 2008)

4 	apologize, apologise, excuse, justify, rationalize, rationalise
*defend, explain, clear away, or make excuses for by reasoning; "rationalize the child's seemingly crazy behavior"; "he rationalized his lack of success"*

Indeed, and Im all for including Natives into our common AMERICAN culture in FULL EQUALITY.. Can you say the same for Palis in israel?  Hell, im ALL FOR a native president!  Can you say that?

and no, MUSLIMS is a generalized term.  PALIS have one homeland.  One with a rich historic FACT built upon where isreal would really, REALLY like to build a temple.

Indeed, so am I.  You can rationalize hatred then so be it.  so too did the Germans think they had a good reason..


----------



## AllieBaba (Jul 25, 2008)

Er..natives are in our common American culture in full equality.

Unless by full equality, you mean eliminating the reservations and the separate Indian nations....


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

One last thing.

I wouldn't give a flying fuk if it were true that Jews selected by ethnic heritage. It's a religion. Religions are allowed to decide whom they take as members, just like every religion in OUR country gets to decide.

And this Hitler comparison you keep making is just insane. Hitler wanted to exterminate two "races," the Jews and Gypsies. Israel is not trying to exterminate anyone AND they apply their law of Return to the entire world, not just Arabs.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Indeed, and Im all for including Natives into our common AMERICAN culture in FULL EQUALITY.. Can you say the same for Palis in israel?  Hell, im ALL FOR a native president!  Can you say that?


I would have no problem with a native president. Just like I have no problem with a Black one. Providing they are in line with my values


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> One last thing.
> 
> I wouldn't give a flying fuk if it were true that Jews selected by ethnic heritage. It's a religion. Religions are allowed to decide whom they take as members, just like every religion in OUR country gets to decide.
> 
> And this Hitler comparison you keep making is just insane. Hitler wanted to exterminate two "races," the Jews and Gypsies. Israel is not trying to exterminate anyone AND they apply their law of Return to the entire world, not just Arabs.



I'm still waiting for the loud mouthed tantrum throwing brat to answer my question about why HE'S insistent on a single state solution where Jews are subjugated and killed when Abbas is looking toward a two-state solution where everyone gets sovreignty.

I'm also waiting for him to tell us who HE is since he's so interested in what I believe or don't believe.

I also think I asked why it's okay to put a mosque over our Holy of Holies when the muslims win in battle, but when Jews win a) we have to keep the mosque; and b) we're supposed to share the country?

I'll wait... but I doubt the loud mouthed tantrum throwing brat will answer.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> I'm still waiting for the loud mouthed tantrum throwing brat to answer my question about why HE'S insistent on a single state solution where Jews are subjugated and killed when Abbas is looking toward a two-state solution where everyone gets sovreignty.
> 
> I'm also waiting for him to tell us who HE is since he's so interested in what I believe or don't believe.
> 
> ...



Since we are speaking again I just have to say, awesome post Jillian. Sums up how I feel about it rather well.


----------



## jillian (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Since we are speaking again I just have to say, awesome post Jillian. Sums up how I feel about it rather well.



I'm a forgiving sort... next time, simply disagree with me, though, and you might get the answers to your questions.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> I'm a forgiving sort... next time, simply disagree with me, though, and you might get the answers to your questions.



enough said, but then why do you keep talking to shog, man that guy throws around the insults like nobody else I know 

Did you see him call ravi the C word. I about shit


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 25, 2008)

jillian said:


> I'm still waiting for the loud mouthed tantrum throwing brat to answer my question about why HE'S insistent on a single state solution where Jews are subjugated and killed when Abbas is looking toward a two-state solution where everyone gets sovreignty.
> 
> I'm also waiting for him to tell us who HE is since he's so interested in what I believe or don't believe.
> 
> ...



Jews don't have to keep a mosque---blow the hell out of it !!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 25, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> enough said, but then why do you keep talking to shog, man that guy throws around the insults like nobody else I know
> 
> Did you see him call ravi the C word. I about shit


The boy has quite a temper, no? I'm kind of glad he's hiding behind his keyboard.

Even though this thread was extremely inflammatory, I actually learned quite a lot about an issue I've never understood before, either through research or from hearing everyone's views. And some of my opinions have changed...on racism, religion, the rights of other countries, the spoils of war...it's been quite interesting.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> The boy has quite a temper, no? I'm kind of glad he's hiding behind his keyboard.
> 
> Even though this thread was extremely inflammatory, I actually learned quite a lot about an issue I've never understood before, either through research or from hearing everyone's views. And some of my opinions have changed...on racism, religion, the rights of other countries, the spoils of war...it's been quite interesting.



He sure does, I know if I called my wife that to her face, she would rip off my wang, cook it up on the stove, and feed it to the dog.

I learned long ago I can call her a lot of names, but not that one.


----------



## José (Jul 25, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Epsilon Delta*
> 5) As for evidence that most palestinians want their own state:



Articles and polls showing the willingness of palestinians to forfeit their right to live in Western Palestine are a dime a dozen, Delta.

Unfortunately, you dont have enough knowledge to confront these attempts to delegitimise the palestinian cause.


----------



## José (Jul 25, 2008)

The misrepresentation of the national aspirations of the Palestinian people by the western press in order to hide the supremacist nature of Israel reminds me of Vietnam.

During 30 years, the Vietnamese who wanted to see their country reunified under the leadership of Vietnams greatest national hero were a small minority according to the polls, until April, 1975 when the American diplomatic staff left Saigon under Vietnamese artillery fire.

The overwhelming support for the right of return, or more broadly, the right of the Palestinian people to live anywhere they want in their homeland, means that anything a palestinian says about one or two states becomes a moot point.

When the vast majority of Palestinians state that forfeiting this right is not an option, they are in fact supporting a *DE FACTO* one state solution.

Nothing less than full access to their entire homeland will satisfy a people whose own national identity was created by that historical loss and the struggle to return to it.

The press duped you into believing the Palestinian people will someday renounce to their right to live in the land lost to Israel and you swallowed the bullshit hook, line and sinker, Delta.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

José;728868 said:
			
		

> The misrepresentation of the national aspirations of the Palestinian people by the western press in order to hide the supremacist nature of Israel reminds me of Vietnam.
> 
> During 30 years, the Vietnamese who wanted to see their country reunified under the leadership of Vietnams greatest national hero were a small minority according to the polls, until April, 1975 when the American diplomatic staff left Saigon under Vietnamese artillery fire.
> 
> ...




Well it is good we have you, our resident expert on what people think, despite what they say, to correct us then.


----------



## José (Jul 26, 2008)

> Originally posted by *jillian*
> When Abbas is looking toward a two-state solution where everyone gets sovreignty.



Good thing you can't speak Arabic because you'd go into a shaking frenzy if you heard the kind of speech Abbas makes when he visits refugee camps.



> Originally posted by *Charles Main*
> Well it is good we have you, our resident expert on what people think, despite what they say, to correct us then.



LOL

The palestinian people have always stated that the right of the refugees to live anywhere they want in Palestine is not even open for discussion.

The fact that this is news to you speaks volumes about your lack of knowledge on the palestinian people, not to mention the value of your "contribution" to this debate.

Now try to find Palestine on a map and let the big boys debate in peace.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 26, 2008)

*Shrugs* I just go by what the majority of the polls say, as well as what the political leadership of Palestine has said (and the majority of the Arab world, and the majority of the international community bar Israel and the US). Don't get me wrong, the IDEAL would be that Israel would be a free and equal society for Jews and Palestinians alike. I just don't see it happening while the ultra-nationalist right is kept in power, building walls and settlements inside Palestine and sucking the resources out.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

José;728880 said:
			
		

> Good thing you can't speak Arabic because you'd go into a shaking frenzy if you heard the kind of speech Abbas makes when he visits refugee camps.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



sure sure, what ever you say BIG BOY. The Palestinians are ready to accept a 2 state solution and recognize Israels right to exist along the 67 borders, Why cant you!


----------



## José (Jul 26, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Charles Main*
> The Palestinians are ready to accept a 2 state solution and recognize Israels right to exist along the 67 borders, Why cant you!



I'd take this information with a grain of salt since it comes from the same western media that portrays the jewish racial dictatorship as a beacon of democracy.

All these polls only impress people who have a superficial knowledge on the palestinian people. The moment you meet real palestinians they all evaporate into thin air.

Seriously, Charles. Don't take it from me. See what I'm saying for yourself. Go to any Palestinian city, village or refugee camp with a bullhorn and starts saying you think Palestinian refugees should not be allowed to return to Western Palestine and try to leave the place alive and in one piece.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 26, 2008)

You've been to Palestine??


----------



## José (Jul 26, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Epsilon Delta*
> *Shrugs* I just go by what the majority of the polls say, as well as what the political leadership of Palestine has said (and the majority of the Arab world, and the majority of the international community bar Israel and the US). Don't get me wrong, the IDEAL would be that Israel would be a free and equal society for Jews and Palestinians alike. I just don't see it happening while the ultra-nationalist right is kept in power, building walls and settlements inside Palestine and sucking the resources out.



Fair enough, Delta.

I don't blame us, westeners, for our ignorance on the palestinian people. I blame the wall of silence built by the western media to hide them.

Just stop for a moment and ask yourself:

How many headlines, documentaries and special reports have you seen in the western media about the daily life in palestinian refugee camps, interviews showing their opinions on Israel, dreams and aspirations?

I like to call palestinians the "invisible refugees" as opposed to the Kosovars who were too much "visible". They are an inconvenience, a nuissance to the West. Their mere existence embarasses the West.

And I didn't even begin to talk about the naked manipulation of their national aspirations by media outlets, Delta.

Let's take what we are discussing for example. The western media trumpets the fact that some palestinians agree with the existence of a palestinian state, and *CONVENIENTLY* forgets to say that *EVEN* these palestinians adamantly rejects any compromise on the right of return.

This is dishonest journalism to the tenth power, Delta... I'm telling you, buddy. As far as the palestinian people are concerned, the western media puts the Pravda to shame.


----------



## José (Jul 26, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Epsilon Delta*
> You've been to Palestine??



Never visited the OT themselves, Delta (Occupied Territories). But I already met lots and lots of Palestinians.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

José;728932 said:
			
		

> Never visited the OT themselves, Delta (Occupied Territories). But I already met lots and lots of Palestinians.



I have lived by plenty of them, In a place called Detroit but still 

largest population of Palestinians out side the middle east ya know!


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

José;728928 said:
			
		

> Fair enough, Delta.
> 
> I don't blame us, westeners, for our ignorance on the palestinian people. I blame the wall of silence built by the western media to hide them.
> 
> ...


Stories about the Palestinians and their plight are but a mouse click away, do not despair.


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 26, 2008)

Well, I dunno... these are the ones I saw. I'm not sure if they qualified as the western media you're talking about.



			
				Epsilon Delta said:
			
		

> 5) As for evidence that most palestinians want their own state:
> 
> Middle East Transparent ? Poll: Majority of Palestinians now support two-state solution
> 
> ...



I wouldn't really expect them to compromise on the right of return, but couldn't they allow 'em back after they become independent? Errrrr, just a thought. I can't say I'm ENTIRELY knowledgable on the negotiations for 'right of return', besides that, you know, Israel is totally opposed to it. But I mean... if Israel markets itself as a home to every Jew on the planet how could they possibly believe that Palestinian refugees abroad couldn't return to an independent Palestine? Or what would stop them, anyway, besides... another illegal invasion?

= \


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

José;728932 said:
			
		

> Never visited the OT themselves, Delta (Occupied Territories). But I already met lots and lots of Palestinians.



How about Israel, or as you like to call it Western Palestine? Ever been there?


----------



## José (Jul 26, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Charles Main*
> How about Israel, or as you like to call it Western Palestine? Ever been there?



Nope, the ones I met where expats living in Jordan.

Charles, I don&#8217;t give a fuck what a brave, courageous jew who opposes the subjugation of the palestinian people chooses to call the West Bank. He may call it West Bank, Eastern Israel, Judea and Samaria for all I care. My admiration for him/her will remain intact. But I will call Western Palestine Israel from now on since names are such a big issue to you.

It&#8217;s a neutral name despite its modern use, buddy. Roman emperors also called the damn place Palestine and as far as I know Julius Caesar never sent any roman legion to help the palestinian cause.


----------



## José (Jul 26, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Epsilon Delta*
> Well, I dunno... these are the ones I saw. I'm not sure if they qualified as the western media you're talking about.



I read your links, Delta, and I can assure you, as far as palestinians being willing to abandon the right of return the guys are lying through their teeth, or rather, manipulating data to their teeth.

Lets distinguish between opinions and just plain lies. When you say something like this:

*Palestinians who are not israeli citizens must not be allowed to live in Israel.*

This is a personal opinion, a value judgement that cannot be deemed incorrect.

But when you say:

*The majority of the palestinians DO NOT support the right of the refugees to live in Israel.
*
Or:

*A substantial number of Israeli jews support the right of return.*

These two statements are just plain false and denote either a total lack of knowledge about the subject or sheer bad faith. More than 95% of the Israeli population rejects totally the right of return and about the same percentage of palestinians passionately supports it.

From the poorest palestinian living in the poorest refugee camp to the palestinian american millionaires in Manhattan the palestinian society massively supports the right of return. 

Any palestinian representative, including the late Arafat, who renounces to this right, will no longer be representing anyone but himself.

Support the existence of the state of Israel all you want, it is your right in a free, democratic society, but lets not rape the facts, people!!!


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 26, 2008)

But but but then where will we find facts and figures to keep arguing fruitlessly?

= (


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

Epsilon Delta said:


> But but but then where will we find facts and figures to keep arguing fruitlessly?
> 
> = (



You may only use sources approved by Jose, didn't you know that.

isn't it fun trying to debate with people who just dismiss your sources as lies, yet provide none of their own!

Fact- the elected leader of the Palestinian people supports and agrees with a 2 state solution based on the 67 borders. 

NEED I SAY MORE??

Now lets make that happen. Then if the Palestinians really do want Israel too they can try to take it and we can all watch them lose what they just gained.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 26, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Fact- the elected leader of the Palestinian people supports and agrees with a 2 state solution based on the 67 borders.



As I understood it, the Palestinians elected a Hamas Government but, like all colonial regimes, the zionist rushed to lock up enough of the popular representatives to give their corrupt quislings a majority, and have proceeded with vile and illegal collective punishments against the area they still controlled.  

I have been fascinated to read the contributions of the pro-zionists to this discussion.   Some, clearly, are in the position of people who would have believed it if told the majority of European Jews in the 'forties were in favour of concentration camps; others are , on this subject, simply raving mad (A single State of Palestine/Israel, for instance, is always one in which 'Jews will be killed'.   Why?   It could only come about by agreement under guarantees, but for the nazis that is immaterial - any limitation on their racist dictatorship for these siegheilers means, as for Hitler, that the world must be pulled down in flames).

Similarly, the notion that Judaism is a _religion_ is one _I_ hold, but, manifestly, a very large number of people now calling themself Jewish are not religious at all.   They are _Jews under Hitler's definition_, and any other definition used by the zionist occupation regime is the most obvious disguise.   But for that last-ditch defence of German capitalism, National Socialism, they'd be no more 'Jewish' than the descendants of Huguenots are necessarily Protestant - it would be just something of interest to family historians.

And instead, Hitler's Triumph, we have this filthy Occupation driving people out of their country, torturing, assassinating and, most of all, killing children to terrorize their Christian and Muslim parents.   Many of those 'returning' to the Land Abraham allegedly attacked and colonised long, long ago - probably the great majority - are the children of converts, particularly Khazars (remember Judaism was an actively proselytising religion until the Christians prevented it).

The whole racist fantasy is sick, sick, sick!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 26, 2008)

You'd only have a case to make, Rhys, if indeed the only defining criteria for being a Jew was racial heritage. It isn't. So please move on.

How do Palestinians decide who is a Palestinian?


----------



## editec (Jul 26, 2008)

The Jewish people debate among themselves what it takes to be a REAL Jew, so expecting any of us to have the DEFINITIVE answer to that question is preposterous.

As to how the *right of return* laws in Isreal are intepreted?

I confess I really do not know.

Does anyone have the definitive answer to that?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 26, 2008)

> As codified in Israeli law as the Law of Return 1950 passed on July 5, 1950, "Every Jew has the right to come to this country as an oleh". The law was amended in 1970 to grant the right to immigrate to Israel to non-Jews who are either children or grandchildren of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew or the spouse of a child or grandchild of a Jew. The amendment was intended to accept in Israel families, mainly from Eastern Europe, where mixed marriages were abundant, and where individuals and family members not considered Jews under the traditional definition might still be subject to anti-Semitism.



Right of return - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> A *Jew* (Hebrew: &#1497;&#1456;&#1492;&#1493;&#1468;&#1491;&#1460;&#1497;, _Yehudi_ (sl.); &#1497;&#1456;&#1492;&#1493;&#1468;&#1491;&#1460;&#1497;&#1501;, _Yehudim_ (pl.); Ladino: &#1490;&#1523;&#1493;&#1491;&#1497;&#1493;, _Djudio_ (sl.); &#1490;&#1523;&#1493;&#1491;&#1497;&#1493;&#1505;, _Djudios_ (pl.); Yiddish: &#1497;&#1497;&#1460;&#1491;, _Yid_ (sl.); &#1497;&#1497;&#1460;&#1491;&#1503;, _Yidn_ (pl.))[8] is a member of the Jewish people, an ethnoreligious group originating from the Israelites or Hebrews of the ancient Middle East. The ethnicity and the religion of Judaism, the traditional faith of the Jewish nation, are strongly interrelated, and converts to Judaism are both included and have been absorbed within the Jewish people throughout the millennia.



Jew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As far as I can tell, there is absolutely nothing that would keep a convert to Judaism from being considered a Jew. So this constant bitching that the Israelis are racist is bullshit.

Now, can someone please tell me what criteria determines membership in the Palestinian "race"?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

jillian said:


> I'm still waiting for the loud mouthed tantrum throwing brat to answer my question about why HE'S insistent on a single state solution where Jews are subjugated and killed when Abbas is looking toward a two-state solution where everyone gets sovreignty.
> 
> I'm also waiting for him to tell us who HE is since he's so interested in what I believe or don't believe.
> 
> ...



I've already posted WHY i am looking at a single state solution.. It may not be the "DEAD JEWS IN MY TEETH " answer you hoped for but I've been EXCEEDINGLY clear about my consistent distaste for RACIST policies.  If you want me to dig up my quote I will do just that, jill.  You see, I HAVE NOT PROBLEM quoting me like you do.  I KNOW full well what i've posted on the subject regardless of your schesty fucking attempts to demonize my position.  this is why it's so fun offering you open access to my chin with your best knockout argument and watching you fail time and again.  Enjoy knowing that.

And, Im poking fun at your beliers because i've seen you insist that you are an atheist in this here jungle when it fits your current scheme.  That, and we BOTH know, poor ravi, that it's not your faith that makes you a jew.  At all.


And, if you are not too fucking stupid or falling over yourself to cry martyr I answered the temple mount question too.  Go read the fucking thread, jill.


FOR CHRISTS SAKE, 60+ fucking pages and you THINK im *AFRAID* to answer your goddamn questions?  HERE I AM, bitch.  READ THEM.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I would have no problem with a native president. Just like I have no problem with a Black one. Providing they are in line with my values



Thats not the question I asked.  Can you say the same about a MUSLIM PM of ISRAEL, mr dual citizen?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Ravi said:


> One last thing.
> 
> I wouldn't give a flying fuk if it were true that Jews selected by ethnic heritage. It's a religion. Religions are allowed to decide whom they take as members, just like every religion in OUR country gets to decide.
> 
> And this Hitler comparison you keep making is just insane. Hitler wanted to exterminate two "races," the Jews and Gypsies. Israel is not trying to exterminate anyone AND they apply their law of Return to the entire world, not just Arabs.



Again, you are three shades of wrong.  Me and every jew posting in this thread knows it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> enough said, but then why do you keep talking to shog, man that guy throws around the insults like nobody else I know
> 
> Did you see him call ravi the C word. I about shit



a word made you just about shit yourself?  I suggest you get that little incontinence problems checked out.  She replies for the same reason you do.


And, consequently, is having her as handed to her for the same reason too.

PPssst!  better go grab some ass paper...



CUUUUNT!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> He sure does, I know if I called my wife that to her face, she would rip off my wang, cook it up on the stove, and feed it to the dog.
> 
> I learned long ago I can call her a lot of names, but not that one.



Fortunately, ravi is not my wife.  And Im not one to use swords against those I love either.  However, im not one to let social taboos regarding vocabulary hinder the point I am making.  


It's hilarious to see you act like a reproachful bitch as if im the only one reaching for the ad hominems, dude.  ALMOST as hilarious as watching you and jill dance around the ethnic element of being jewish.


The whole "jews get to hold a racist state standard becuase I think it's ok" routine though.. thats just sad.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> sure sure, what ever you say BIG BOY. The Palestinians are ready to accept a 2 state solution and recognize Israels right to exist along the 67 borders, Why cant you!



Can you PROVE this?  I can prove otherwise.  Ive posted the goddamn article from the LA Times at last 4 times in this thread alone already.  

Hey!  WHY don't you assume he just hates JEWS and wants to bath in hebrew blood!  I bet he likes gore and guts and veins in his teeth!  As long as it's jewish, that is!


Whip out your evidence, homeboy.  You failed the last time you tried this "palis just want to leave the land too" bullshit.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Stories about the Palestinians and their plight are but a mouse click away, do not despair.



then you should have no problem posting them as evidence, eh?


clearly, evidence is antisemetic.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Epsilon Delta said:


> But but but then where will we find facts and figures to keep arguing fruitlessly?
> 
> = (



oh well from the JEWISH VIRTUAL LIBRARY and Jpost!


im sure THOSE sources will say what a zionist is wanting to see.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> You may only use sources approved by Jose, didn't you know that.
> isn't it fun trying to debate with people who just dismiss your sources as lies, yet provide none of their own!
> Fact- the elected leader of the Palestinian people supports and agrees with a 2 state solution based on the 67 borders.
> NEED I SAY MORE??
> Now lets make that happen. Then if the Palestinians really do want Israel too they can try to take it and we can all watch them lose what they just gained.





uh, the ELECTED leader, buddy?  You mean the guy who WON the election with THE MOST VOTES?  Or, did you mean the guy that israel decided was an ACCEPTABLE winner?  the PUPPET?  How many American Presidents are you willing to let some foreighn power elect?

oh wait.. your jewish.. thats a trick question.


you see, THIS is the kind of shit that gets you called out on your scheisty fucking sources.  

Hamas Sweeps Palestinian Elections, Complicating Peace Efforts in Mideast
Hamas Sweeps Palestinian Elections, Complicating Peace Efforts in Mideast - washingtonpost.com


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Ravi said:


> You'd only have a case to make, Rhys, if indeed the only defining criteria for being a Jew was racial heritage. It isn't. So please move on.
> 
> How do Palestinians decide who is a Palestinian?






still not getting it yet, ar ya ya little goyim puppet?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

editec said:


> The Jewish people debate among themselves what it takes to be a REAL Jew, so expecting any of us to have the DEFINITIVE answer to that question is preposterous.
> 
> As to how the *right of return* laws in Isreal are intepreted?
> 
> ...



Hey, I"VE posted my evidnce.  JILL nor Chuck wants to clarify because they both know damn well it's not merely faith that makes them jewish.  You can argue with the fucking jewish virtual library if you want to.  The FACT remains that a converted Asian can never be a JEW while a Cohen is undeniably so.

Now, the very fact that there IS a law of return would send you into a fucking human rights fit if it were ANY other people applying such bullshit demographics control.  WHY do you accept a double standard for jews?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 26, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Right of return - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> Jew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> ...








you are so CUTE, ravikins...


and, just so you know, palis are ARABS.  Lets see if you can follow along in SAT question form..


Israeli:JEWISH:alestinian:ARAB

follow the rabbit lil ravi-snukums...

Palestinian people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Ravi (Jul 26, 2008)

From the 1970 amendment to the Law of Return:


> 4B. For the  purposes of this Law,  "Jew" means a person who  was born  of a  Jewish mother  or has become  converted  to Judaism  and who  is not  a member of another religion."




The Law of Return

An Asian converted to Judaism is a Jew.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 26, 2008)

Ravi said:


> You'd only have a case to make, Rhys, if indeed the only defining criteria for being a Jew was racial heritage. It isn't. So please move on.
> 
> How do Palestinians decide who is a Palestinian?



Palestinians are those born in Palestine and those descended from them but prevented by the Occupation Authority from living at home, obviously.   Thus, as was the case in the Six Counties, the settlers - especially those not guilty of crimes against humanity - are also citizens.   It is for this reason, amongst so many others, that a two-state solution can't possibly work:  it emphasises the fact that the settlers _are_ murderous thieves, whereas many of them in fact just inherit what was stolen and even oppose the sick nazi regime the US subsidises.

As far as I am concerned, a Jew is a member of a particular religion.   There is no 'Jewish race' or any other 'race' - all that stuff is the merest drivel - so there can be no 'racial heritage'.   There are lots of people formed in the culture based on that religion, as there are ex-chapel people in my own country, and I find both fascinating.   You yourself are an example of a different  'Jewry', formed by Hitler, and imitating his squalid rant and his racist killings.   YOU move on; ha'porth.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 26, 2008)

Then why do you keep calling Jews racists? They do not limit membership into their religion based on race.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 26, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Then why do you keep calling Jews racists? They do not limit membership into their religion based on race.



The race does however discourage conversion to their religion and should you convert you will always known as a non-jew who converted.

from the Talmud



> "Converts are as difficult for Israel as a blight!"


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Thats not the question I asked.  Can you say the same about a MUSLIM PM of ISRAEL, mr dual citizen?



The Laws of Israel do not forbid it Shog, as the 12 Muslim members of the Knesset show us. Has it happened yet, not, can it Yes.

Has there been a Native American president of he US yet? NO, so what is the difference again? put that in your pipe and smoke it MR know it all!


----------



## editec (Jul 26, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Right of return - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


 
Thanks. I wasn't entire sure what the wording was.




> Jew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


 
Ah yes, the question of who is a "real" Jew. Let's debate that one for the next six thousand years, shall we?



> As far as I can tell, there is absolutely nothing that would keep a convert to Judaism from being considered a Jew. So this constant bitching that the Israelis are racist is bullshit.


 
Yes, it is. It's ethnocentric, but not racist. 



> Now, can someone please tell me what criteria determines membership in the Palestinian "race"?


 
 I can propose a workable  definition, if you're interested. 

Anyone who are either a current or former resident of what was called formerly Palestine (in 1948), the children or grandchildren of a former or current resident of what was formerly known as Palestine, the spouse of a same, or the spouse of a child or grandchild of same.

No, I am not trying to be a smart ass

But the wording used for the Jewish right of return law is just so beautifully crafted that there's really no sense in my trying to improve on it.

Note how both "rights of return" philosophies end up exacerbating the problems that Isreal/palestine is facing today?  They don't solve anything they actually make the problem worse.

What a _mess!_


Thank you for _nothing,_ Prime Minister Authur Balfour


----------



## jillian (Jul 26, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> The race does however discourage conversion to their religion and should you convert you will always known as a non-jew who converted.
> 
> from the Talmud





> Halakha forbids reminding a convert that he or she was once not a Jew and hence little distinction is made in Judaism between "Jews by birth" and "Jews by choice".



Conversion to Judaism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Musta missed that since it couldn't be used to bash Jews.


----------



## dilloduck (Jul 26, 2008)

jillian said:


> Conversion to Judaism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Musta missed that since it couldn't be used to bash Jews.



They wouldnt do it to the converts face, naturally. Why does the talmud consider convert a "blight".


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> They wouldnt do it to the converts face, naturally. Why does the talmud consider convert a "blight".



Last time I checked the Talmud was not part of the Government of Israel. 

So why do you Fault Israel for the Talmud, But not every Christian and Muslim Nation on earth for there own Extremists?


----------



## Epsilon Delta (Jul 26, 2008)

Wikipedia said:
			
		

> The plan [Arab Peace Initiative of March 2008] consists of a proposal to end the Arab-Israeli conflict. It offers Israel normalization of relations and comprehensive peace agreements with Arab countries in exchange for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all the Occupied Territories including the Golan Heights, and the recognition of "an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital," as well as a "just solution" for the Palestinian refugees.[1]
> 
> Hamas' spokesman Ismail Abu Shanab said on the same day that his organisation would accept the initiative:
> 
> "That would be satisfactory for all Palestinian military groups to stop and build our state, to be busy in our own affairs, and have good neighborhood with Israelis."[2]



Arab Peace Initiative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Arab Peace Inititative


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 26, 2008)

Also picking one phrase out of the Talmud to hold up as evidence of racism is as dishonest as plucking one verse out of Biblical context to hold up as evidence of the evils of Christianity.  Jews are not hostile to converts and, unless one is caught claiming to convert but has ulterior and unworthy motives for doing so, converts are welcomed with open arms into Judaism.

Converting to Judaism


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Also picking one phrase out of the Talmud to hold up as evidence of racism is as dishonest as plucking one verse out of Biblical context to hold up as evidence of the evils of Christianity.  Jews are not hostile to converts and, unless one is caught claiming to convert but has ulterior and unworthy motives for doing so, converts are welcomed with open arms into Judaism.
> 
> Converting to Judaism




With the Way Jews are treated on this Board, and in the world in General by many people. I have to wonder why anyone would want to convert to be one??


----------



## Foxfyre (Jul 26, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> With the Way Jews are treated on this Board, and in the world in General by many people. I have to wonder why anyone would want to convert to be one??



Those that do almost certainly find something of value in the religion. Many of us Christians relate deeply to the Jewish heritage from which Christianity has evolved. But you are right that Jews do attract more than their fair share of suspicion, discrimination, and downright disrespect, and that is certainly evident in the more radical leftwingers on this board too.

And it underscores why there is a need for Israel.  It is the one place on Earth where a Jew can be a Jew openly and freely without worrying about his/her own countrymen disrespecting him/her or taking anything away from him/her because s/he is a Jew.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 26, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> And it underscores why there is a need for Israel.  It is the one place on Earth where a Jew can be a Jew openly and freely without worrying about his/her own countrymen disrespecting him/her or taking anything away from him/her because s/he is a Jew.



I could not have said it better myself, and this is why I will never support a one state solution. Jews already have plenty of Countries they can live in and be the butt of jokes, and the target of hate, and suspicion from there fellow country men.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 26, 2008)

I dunno, Editec, it seems to me the definition of ethnocentric is no different than the definition of racism. And since anyone can become a Jew, I don't think it can be defined as racism.

I do see that having one plot of land with different groups claiming the right of return is a recipe for disaster. But since the Jews were given the land by the international community, I think the Pals are just shit out of luck. Does that make it right? Perhaps not, but it is the way of the world.


----------



## José (Jul 27, 2008)

I said it before and Ill say it again:

People who support the peaceful dismantlement of ethnocratic states and their replacement by democratic states ruled by majority or with limited federal autonomy under the supervision of the international community are no more radicals than an american civil rights activist in the 60s or anti apartheid activists in the 80s.

These individuals are, *by definition*, the only moderates in this entire debate.

On the other hand, people who rationalize, sugar-coat and make up excuses for racial dictatorships that keep the unofficial ethnicity crammed into ethnic enclaves fit the definition of braindead super patriotic american clowns like a glove.


----------



## José (Jul 27, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Ravi*
> I do see that having one plot of land with different groups claiming the right of return is a recipe for disaster. But since the Jews were given the land by the international community, I think the Pals are just shit out of luck. Does that make it right? Perhaps not, but it is the way of the world.



The way of the world...

This is how most people in the US and the rest of the western world see the treatment of palestinians. 

No democracy, no desegregation, no official appologies, no compensations... 

Just a group of human beings whose rights and national aspirations can be disregarded to serve a greater good... 

One of the great ironies of the 20th century:

The victims of one of the most ferocious supremacist states in History imposing another supremacist state on a people who never harmed them in any way.

On 9/11, the dehumanization of the palestinian people came back to haunt the dehumanizer like a boomerang that comes full circle and hits its thrower in the face.

Small wonder the dehumanized, the usual victims of Apaches and F-16s, celebrated and danced in the streets for hours on end.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 27, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Then why do you keep calling Jews racists? They do not limit membership into their religion based on race.



As you very well know, Polly, I have never called Jews racist, and it is very evident that Goebbels was one of your ancestors, whatever his alleged 'race'.   _Zionists_ are racists, not least because they take their beliefs from German nationalism, up to and including Hitler.


----------



## editec (Jul 27, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> But you are right that Jews do attract more than their fair share of suspicion, discrimination, and downright disrespect, and that is certainly evident in the more radical leftwingers on this board too.


 
You the skinheads an crypto NAZIs haunting this place are _left wingers?!_

Wait.. do you also think that Bush is a liberal, too?


----------



## editec (Jul 27, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I dunno, Editec, it seems to me the definition of ethnocentric is no different than the definition of racism. And since anyone can become a Jew, I don't think it can be defined as racism.


 
No there's a difference.  One can think one's culture is superior to all others, and that culture can include many races.





> I do see that having one plot of land with different groups claiming the right of return is a recipe for disaster. But since the Jews were given the land by the international community, I think the Pals are just shit out of luck. Does that make it right? Perhaps not, but it is the way of the world.


 
Yeah, well that's why the problem continues, isn't it?  

The Pals don't think they're shit out of luck, and they _don't care_ what the international community thinks.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 27, 2008)

José;729711 said:
			
		

> These individuals are, *by definition*, the only moderates in this entire debate.



Bullshit, Moderates are the ones who support a 2 state solution. 

People like you who want to dismantle Israel are indeed extremist. whether you choose to admit it or not.


----------



## Truthmatters (Jul 27, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> Do you think Israel or America are 100 percent innocent in the way we deal with Palistine or every other Arab country?
> 
> I tend to agree with Israel, but I also try to see things from the other side.
> 
> ...




The Grand canyon is bordered by Arizona and Nevada.


----------



## Truthmatters (Jul 27, 2008)

sealybobo said:


> Do you think Israel or America are 100 percent innocent in the way we deal with Palistine or every other Arab country?
> 
> I tend to agree with Israel, but I also try to see things from the other side.
> 
> ...




The Grand canyon is bordered by Arizona and Nevada.
Grand Canyon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Ravi (Jul 27, 2008)

editec said:


> No there's a difference.  One can think one's culture is superior to all others, and that culture can include many races.



Ah, I see it now.


----------



## MasTequila (Jul 27, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I am part jewish, and a dual citizen of both the US and Israel. I refrain from posting on Israel related issues because people will just assume bias.



So your insight on the issues to yourself?  That sounds selfish.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 27, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> The Grand canyon is bordered by Arizona and Nevada.



Not to mention that Jews never lived in the grand canyon, While they did live in the area of moderen day Isreal, did and have almost continuesly for 4000 years.

That is just a stupid comparison.


----------



## José (Jul 28, 2008)

Editec

You remind me of Claus Stauffenberg, the german colonel executed after a failed assassination attempt against Hitler. The mistreatment of the jewish people was one of the reasons that led him to conspire against Hitler. The sad spectacle of european jews being herded into ghettos by his own country hurt Stauffenberg to no end. 

Similarly, the fact that american military hardware is used to kill the palestinian people seems to be something that deeply offends your sense of morality. 

So you seem to be in the good company of the German hero.


----------



## José (Jul 28, 2008)

Delta 

The difficulty you have to understand the exact meaning of official statements by palestinian leaders is due to the fact that you don&#8217;t know the so-called &#8220;*PALESTINIAN PLAN OF PHASES*&#8221;.

The essence of this plan is to establish any kind of provisional government in any part of Palestine and use this territory as a base for operations to continue their struggle.

The Oslo peace process was, in fact, an implementation of the palestinian plan of phases. Thanks to Oslo, the PLO could return to Palestine from its exile in Tunisia and establish the Palestinian Authority in exchange for a nominal, pseudo recognition of the state of Israel (without dropping the right of return).

This is the fundamental point that you misinterpret, Delta. When palestinian leaders talk about recognising Israel and establishing a palestinian government they are referring to a provisional government to continue their struggle and the &#8220;recognition&#8221; of Israel they talk about amounts to nothing, it&#8217;s only a verbal, empty recognition because the right of return is not dropped. 

Charles Main, somewhat unconsciously, described the palestinian plan of phases more or less acurately in a previous post:

*Now lets make that happen (two states). Then if the Palestinians really do want Israel too they can try to take it* and we can all watch them lose what they just gained.


----------



## José (Jul 28, 2008)

Heres an interview with Arafat, Delta. He was referring to the status of Jerusalem because every palestinian leader knows the right of return cannot be adressed openly since the subject is tabboo in the West. (you dont need to read the whole text just the words in red):

*AMANPOUR: So, no, in other words?

ARAFAT: No doubt, I can't betray my people. I can't betray the Arabs. I can't betray the Christians. I can't betray the Moslems. And he has to respect all these items concerning the Christianity and the Islam.

ARAFAT: First of all, I respect what I had mentioned and promised my people, my nation, my religions, the Christianity and the Islam, and I am not going to betray them.

AMANPOUR: A lot has been made of Arab public opinion and, as you keep saying, I will not betray the people.

ARAFAT: Would you betray your people?

AMANPOUR: But...

ARAFAT: Would you betray your people? 

AMANPOUR: I'm not in the same position you are.

ARAFAT: In your duty, in your position, are you ready to betray your people?

AMANPOUR: Well, then the question then is, the people want a future...

ARAFAT: You -- I am asking you clearly and obviously...

AMANPOUR: Yes.

ARAFAT: ... do you accept to betray your people?

CNN Transcript - Special Event: Arafat and Barak: The Quest for Peace - September 10, 2000*

I know its extremely hard for a westener to understand a people who is subjected to a massive information blackout and manipulation by the western media. But believe me, buddy, Arafat said more in that interview than a thousand official statements you can find on the Internet.

*I cant betray my people*.

TRANSLATION:

*I DONT HAVE ENOUGH AUTHORITY TO FORFEIT THE RIGHT OF MY PEOPLE TO LIVE IN WESTERN PALESTINE*.

*I WILL BE DELEGITIMISED IF I TRY TO DO SO*.

A palestinian leader, even Arafat, who compromises the right of the palestinian people to live in their homeland is already a FORMER palestinian leader, totally delegitimised in the eyes of his people.


----------



## José (Jul 28, 2008)

As long as you keep on focusing your attention on what Palestinian leaders say in English for foreign consumption and ignore what they say in arabic among themselves you&#8217;ll continue to misunderstand the whole Israeli/Palestinian conflict, Delta.

People who are unaware of the palestinian plan of phases are easily impressed by official statements like the ones you quoted.

I fully understand the tremendous psychological impact these official statements have on the mind of the laymen because many years ago I was a layman too.

And even today I&#8217;m not immune to making the same mistake: believing everything a given political leader says.

Show me an international conflict I know little or nothing about and I&#8217;ll probably do exactly the same thing.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 28, 2008)

Ravi said:


> From the 1970 amendment to the Law of Return:
> 
> 
> The Law of Return
> ...





yea.. keep telling yourself that.  If you think a CHOW has as much relevancy in the Law of Return as a Cohen then you are clearly not interested in knowing the truth of the matter.  Again, why do you think neither Jill or Chucky wants to admit that it's not their FAITH that makes them jewish?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 28, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> The Laws of Israel do not forbid it Shog, as the 12 Muslim members of the Knesset show us. Has it happened yet, not, can it Yes.
> 
> Has there been a Native American president of he US yet? NO, so what is the difference again? put that in your pipe and smoke it MR know it all!




the LAW OF RETURN sets up a racist criteria for packing the demographics with jews, chucky.. If you insist on trying to spin the point I make about the racist state standard and the motivation behind maintaining jewish control, despite democracy, i'll have to put you in the same corner as Ravi.

But, I assure you, WERE THERE A NATIVE CANDIDATE nothing in OUR government states that white people need to facilitate their ethnic dominance by importing more CAUCASIAN europeans.  

Indeed, put that in YOUR hookah and smoke it, mr rationalized racism.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 28, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Last time I checked the Talmud was not part of the Government of Israel.
> 
> So why do you Fault Israel for the Talmud, But not every Christian and Muslim Nation on earth for there own Extremists?



HA!

yea.. hebrew dogma has NO input to israeli law!

*The Israeli Supreme Court*
The Influence of Jewish Law

*The Declaration of Independence promised to establish a state based on the social justice envisaged by the Hebrew prophets, and Jewish legal codes are often consulted by Supreme Court justices when crafting their decisions.* The justices must also take into consideration international treaties to which Israel is a signatory, like the Geneva Conventions. Finally, the Supreme Court also keeps an eye on legal precedent in leading democracies such as the United States. 
My Jewish Learning: The Israeli Supreme Court


*Israel's Marriage Law*
srael's Parliament has passed a law preventing Palestinians who marry Israelis from living in Israel. The move was denounced by human rights organisations as racist, undemocratic and discriminatory.

Under the new law, rushed through yesterday, Palestinians alone will be excluded from obtaining citizenship or residency. Anyone else who marries an Israeli will be entitled to Israeli citizenship. Now Israeli Arabs who marry Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza Strip will either have to move to the occupied territories, or live apart from their husband or wife. Their children will be affected too: from the age of 12 they will be denied citizenship or residency and forced to move out of Israel. 
ZNet - Marriage Law


*Israeli marriage law blocks citizenship for Palestinians*
(08-01) 04:00 PDT Jerusalem -- The Israeli parliament voted on Thursday to block Palestinians who marry Israelis from becoming Israeli citizens or residents.

Supporters of the legislation called it a necessary bulwark against infiltration by terrorists. "We are in a state of war -- not with the English, or the Americans, or the Dutch, or the Slovaks -- we are at war with our neighbors, the Palestinians," Gideon Sa'ar, of the dominant Likud Party, said in debate before the vote. "It's a tragic reality."

*Proponents also called the law a way to preserve Israel's Jewish majority. *
Israeli marriage law blocks citizenship for Palestinians

*
UN blasts Israeli marriage law*
A United Nations panel has urged Israel to repeal a new law forcing Palestinians who marry Israelis to live separate lives.

The Geneva-based Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination unanimously approved a resolution saying the Israeli law violated an international human rights treaty.

However the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, accused the panel of bias.

On 31 July the Israeli parliament approved a law preventing Palestinians married to Israelis from gaining Israeli citizenship or residency. 
BBC NEWS | Middle East | UN blasts Israeli marriage law



EVIDENCE sure is antisemetic!


----------



## Shogun (Jul 28, 2008)

Foxfyre said:


> Those that do almost certainly find something of value in the religion. Many of us Christians relate deeply to the Jewish heritage from which Christianity has evolved. But you are right that Jews do attract more than their fair share of suspicion, discrimination, and downright disrespect, and that is certainly evident in the more radical leftwingers on this board too.
> 
> And it underscores why there is a need for Israel.  *It is the one place on Earth where a Jew can be a Jew openly and freely without worrying about his/her own countrymen disrespecting him/her or taking anything away from him/her because s/he is a Jew.*



Are you kidding me?  WHERE ARE THE witch hunts digging out all the jews in America?


this is the kind of bullshit an Aryan could admire.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 28, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> I could not have said it better myself, and this is why I will never support a one state solution. Jews already have plenty of Countries they can live in and be the butt of jokes, and the target of hate, and suspicion from there fellow country men.



yea..  you are SOOO marginalized here in the US!  It's almost as if this gov filters out your collective influence EVERYWHERE!




cry me a fucking river, dude.  Racism stinks even if it comes from the ass of a jew.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 28, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Bullshit, Moderates are the ones who support a 2 state solution.
> 
> People like you who want to dismantle Israel are indeed extremist. whether you choose to admit it or not.



wrong answer, bud.. MODERATES dont have a reason to favor either side.  CLEARLY, you do and are no moderate.

Democracy may seem like a big scary jew hating beast to you but thats just because you know that it wont respect your RACIST standard.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 28, 2008)

Poor Charles, stuck in the corner with rational Ravi.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 28, 2008)

ignorant ravi is more like it.


Lets see you get ole CHUCK to admit that Chingtang Chow, a new faithful convert, is as much of a jew as Abraham Cohen, a rabid athiest.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 28, 2008)

Shogun said:


> ignorant ravi is more like it.
> 
> 
> Lets see you get ole CHUCK to admit that Chingtang Chow, a new faithful convert, is as much of a jew as Abraham Cohen, a rabid athiest.



In faith he is, by blood he clearly is not. Like I said I think the problem is the common use of JEW to decribe Both a religion and a race. The Race being Hebrews.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 28, 2008)

Yep, and the right of return applies to converts, too, as much as Shog wishes it didn't.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 28, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Poor Charles, stuck in the corner with rational Ravi.




Fine company if you ask me. I may not agree with you on everything, But I respect your opinions a lot more than MR childish name caller! If he wanted to be taken seriously you would think he would act more like an adult.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 28, 2008)

Shogun said:


> wrong answer, bud.. MODERATES dont have a reason to favor either side.  CLEARLY, you do and are no moderate.


Your right, moderates side with the majority of Both Jews and Palestinians. The ones that support the comprimse solution of 2 states based on the 67 borders. While Extreamist Jews would like to take all the West bank and Gaza, and Extreamist Palestinians want to get rid of Israel, wether by force, or through a single state solution that would eventually make the Jews a tiny minority in an Islamic Nation, and lead to them just getting out.

However feel free to keep saying you are the Moderate and I am just a racist. You could toss in some childish name calling if you like too.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 29, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> In faith he is, by blood he clearly is not. Like I said I think the problem is the common use of JEW to decribe Both a religion and a race. The Race being Hebrews.



A race is a contest between runners.   A Jew is a member of a religion, and like all religions Judaism has a penumbra of ex-members. people with family connections, people with a soft spot for the old folks' religion and so on.   I was brought up an Anglican myself, and but for the small problem that I cannot imagine what people mean by this word 'God' they all throw around so confidently, I'd be one still.   All my attitudes, all my jokes, my whole value system are rooted in Anglicanism, and in that sense I'll be an Anglican till I die.   Not so my children.

That does NOT mean that I belong to some fantasised Anglican 'race'.   Admittedly, Judaism was once a tribal religion, but that was a _very_ long time ago, and in between lies a very long period of proselyting all sorts of people from all over the place.   The 'son of a Jewish mother' thing is one of those fossils you get in all religions:   in any sane world, a Jew is someone committed to a specific religion.

In the 'thirties, alas, they didn't live in a sane world:   as always when capitalism is under threat, _any_ old intellectual hogwash people might accept was used to build up a lower-middle-class thuggery to save it - and in the German case it was this 'race' drivel so beloved of the zionists.   People with a relation to Judaism like mine to Anglicanism - ex-believers, distant relatives, God-knows who - were swept up under this foul fantasy and murdered.   Those who had long since got away to Palestine happily accepted this grotesque fantasy, demanding somewhere to do their racing in - and, sooner than take in the survivors, various states too big to be bribed willingly voted for this new ghetto.   Very large numbers with nowhere else to go went where they could and accepted the necessary gobbledygook, which, since it was never analysed, came at last to seem 'normal'.

Why not base the Reichlette on Witchcraft or Phlogiston?   They make as much - and as little - sense.


----------



## José (Jul 29, 2008)

You know what, Rhys

Ive already lost all hope to understand the mind of super patriotic american clowns.

The political thinking (if we can even call it that) of the typical super patriotic american clown is *screwed in the head*, its a schizophrenic political thinking because it divides racial dictatorships into two categories:

1) "bad" racial dictatorships (United States, Germany and South África)

2) "good" racial dictatorships (Israel)

Go figure...


----------



## José (Jul 29, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Charles Main*
> Your right, moderates side with the majority of Both Jews and Palestinians.



Are you referring to the same palestinian majority Arafat said 9 times he could not betray by legitimising the ethnic cleansing of Western Palestine? The same majority that would totally ignore any such aggreement and keep on fighting for their right to live and move freely in their homeland?

Wake up and smell the coffee!!

*Two state solution = betray the palestinian people*



> Originally posted by *Charles Main*
> While Extreamist Jews would like to take all the West bank and Gaza, and Extreamist Palestinians want to get rid of Israel, wether by force, or through a single state solution that would eventually make the Jews a tiny minority in an Islamic Nation, and lead to them just getting out.



But now youre contradicting yourself because youve stated in a previous post:



> Not to mention that Jews never lived in the grand canyon, *While they did live in the area of moderen day Isreal, did and have almost continuesly for 4000 years*.



How could the so-called palestinian jews have lived in the Holy Land for so long when arabs made up the overwhelming majority of the population during the last 800 years?

Make up your mind, Charles:

*EITHER* palestinians are genocidal monsters who want to rid Palestine of Jews, at best, or kill them all, at worst, *OR* palestinian jews have a continous history in Palestine for the last 2000 years.

Choose one because *BOTH* statements cannot be true.



> Originally posted by *Charles Main*
> While Extreamist Jews would like to take all the West bank and Gaza, and Extreamist Palestinians want to get rid of Israel, wether by force, or through a single state solution that would eventually make the Jews a tiny minority in an Islamic Nation, and lead to them just getting out.



Do you mean extremists like Stauffenberg and so many other european extremistswho saw your people being herded into the Warsaw Ghetto, just like Palestinians in Gaza today?

Extremists who thought the Nazi regime brought shame to Germany and advocated racial equality between Germans and Jews?

Its ironic that Israel dedicated a whole memorial to those extremists. Its called Yad Vashem.

Or are you referring to those american extremists who, almost a century ago, thought Indians should not be confined in reservations (awfully similar to the arab reservation known as Gaza) and should get some kind of compensation for their territorial losses?

Or maybe those younger extremists who advocated the right to vote for blacks and desegregation of the South?

Or do you mean those south african extremists who dared to say legalised racism was not moderate at all?

Well... learn something new everyday... 

I didnt know racism, segregation and apartheid were supported by moderates in this day and age and democracy and racial equality were extremist stuff in the 21th century.

Did you hear that, Shogun?

Lets advocate the recreation of the Warsaw Ghetto and invite jillian and Chuck to be the first inhabitants...

Lets take away all the cassinos from the Indians and resegregate the South.

Lets recreate Transkei, Ciskei and all the other pseudo republics where blacks were kept and declare Mandela and Tutu honorary citizens of those Bantustans.

Lets do all that so we can be moderates too, just like Chuck.


----------



## editec (Jul 29, 2008)

Shogun said:


> wrong answer, bud.. MODERATES dont have a reason to favor either side. CLEARLY, you do and are no moderate.
> 
> Democracy may seem like a big scary jew hating beast to you but thats just because you know that it wont respect your RACIST standard.


 
I can certainly understand why you advocate for a _single_ truly democratic representational goverment in the place some call Isreal and others call Palestine.

I think you are expecting a people, a people who are convinced that creating such a truly democratic nation would amount to mass suicide, to ignore the obvious fact that there one shitload of Palestinians who hate them (perhaps with just cause, I might add) enough to kill them.

You _do _understand that that is what the Isrealis think would happen to them, right?

Tell me that you _understand_ that.

Even if you dont' believe that they are_ right_ about that outcome, please tell you you can at least understand that THAT is _their point of view_.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 29, 2008)

José;731117 said:
			
		

> 1) "bad" racial dictatorships (United States, Germany and South África)
> 
> 2) "good" racial dictatorships (Israel)
> 
> Go figure...



Maybe the problem is we just don't believe the USA and Israel are "racial dictatorships."


----------



## José (Jul 29, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> I can certainly understand why you advocate for a single truly democratic representational goverment in the place some call Isreal and others call Palestine.
> 
> I think you are expecting a people, a people who are convinced that creating such a truly democratic nation would amount to mass suicide, to ignore the obvious fact that there one shitload of Palestinians who hate them (perhaps with just cause, I might add) enough to kill them.
> ...



I can't speak for Shogun but since I advocate the same solution to this conflict I feel the question was also directed at me.

Of course I understand both the real and imaginary security concerns of the jewish people.

That's exactly why I don't support the traditional democratic model for the region of Palestine: majority rule but an international protectorate where both ethnic groups will enjoy limited national sovereignty at the federal leven under the supervision of the international community.

Since the right to live in Western Palestine is the *NON-NEGOTIABLE CORE OF THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY*, some form of controlled, supervised unitary state is the only solution to that troubled land.


----------



## editec (Jul 29, 2008)

Rhys said:


> A race is a contest between runners. A Jew is a member of a religion, and like all religions Judaism has a penumbra of ex-members. people with family connections, people with a soft spot for the old folks' religion and so on. I was brought up an Anglican myself, and but for the small problem that I cannot imagine what people mean by this word 'God' they all throw around so confidently, I'd be one still. All *my attitudes, all my jokes, my whole value system are rooted in Anglicanism, and in that sense I'll be an Anglican till I die. Not so my children*.


 
That is deep. 



> That does NOT mean that I belong to some fantasised Anglican 'race'. Admittedly, Judaism was once a tribal religion, but that was a _very_ long time ago, and in between lies a very long period of proselyting all sorts of people from all over the place. The 'son of a Jewish mother' thing is one of those fossils you get in all religions: *in any sane world, a Jew is someone committed to a specific religion*.


 
Yeah, right. 

Let me know when the ship is leaving for that world, would you? 

The secular Jews of Germany thought they lived in a sane world. They were mistaken. That's a mistake they're not apt for forget having made anytime soon, I think. 



> In the 'thirties, alas, they didn't live in a sane world: as always when capitalism is under threat, _any_ old intellectual hogwash people might accept was used to build up a lower-middle-class thuggery to save it - and in the German case it was this 'race' drivel so beloved of the zionists.


 
Some Zionists without doubt are enthocentric jerks. Some are just pragmatists who feel they might as well be Zionists since the others won't let them play in any of their reindeer games. 



> People with a relation to Judaism like mine to Anglicanism - ex-believers, distant relatives, God-knows who - were swept up under this foul fantasy and murdered.


 
_Yup!_ 

And some gentiles were swept under that same rug for objecting to that foul fantasy, too. Sadly not enough, but enough to inspire some of us never to forget them, either. 



> Those who had long since got away to Palestine happily accepted this grotesque fantasy, demanding somewhere to do their racing in - and, sooner than take in the survivors, various states too big to be bribed willingly voted for this new ghetto. Very large numbers with nowhere else to go went where they could and accepted the necessary gobbledygook, which, since it was never analysed, came at last to seem 'normal'.


 
When all the saints are sinners, then all the sinners saints.



> Why not base the Reichlette on Witchcraft or Phlogiston? They make as much - and as little - sense.


 
If by the term "Reichlette" you are referring to Isreal, then no, Witchcraft or Philogiston (which I presume is some word for a different Palestine) really doesn't make sense. People can learn from history, they can forgive history, but they cannot forget it.

The Jews of Isreal cannot forget the holocaust, and the Palesinians cannot forget their more recent diaspora. They once lived in a place they think of a Palestine. Where is _their _home? Where are their olive groves? 

That's the crux of the problem, isn't it?

Two victimized peoples squabbling over one land while we who are above the fray egg them on, or chastise them for finding themselves in that impossible position.

I try to imagine what might have happened if the Jews of Europe and the Arabs of Palestine could have found some way to become one people, a people in that single state solution that people like Shogun imagine the international community can forge for them, now.

It would have been a magnificent nation, folks. 

The Palestinians were the most educated Arabs in the former Ottoman empire, you know? 

Lost opportunity is never found.

We've got to work with what we've got _on the ground, today._

We've GOT to imagine the point of view not only of the most rational Israelis and Palestinians, but of the most irrational of both sides, too, and we've got to find some way to accomodate all of them.

Let's remember what happened to the Israeli leader and the Egyptian one, too, who were peacemakers, shall we?

The moderates among the Palestinians and the Isrealis (and I believe they exist in numbers far larger than any of us are lead to believe) need the world's support. 

Sadly this is not an age of moderation.

But THEY, the people of Isreal and the people of Palestine have GOT to be the people to make their peace.

The "international community" is the root source of their problem to begin with. Let's all try to remember, that, shall we?

NOBODY on either sides trust the international community to keep the peace or to protect their interests.

Why should they?

They're not damned fools.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 29, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Your right, moderates side with the majority of Both Jews and Palestinians. The ones that support the comprimse solution of 2 states based on the 67 borders. While Extreamist Jews would like to take all the West bank and Gaza, and Extreamist Palestinians want to get rid of Israel, wether by force, or through a single state solution that would eventually make the Jews a tiny minority in an Islamic Nation, and lead to them just getting out.
> 
> However feel free to keep saying you are the Moderate and I am just a racist. You could toss in some childish name calling if you like too.



You dont speak for pals, bud.. I realize your chosen race status makes you feel superior enough to just KNOW what people think but arent pulling any shit that an Aryan didnt try.

EXTREMISTS don't believe in DEMOCRACY, sucker.  just liek you.  Lets allow everyone a vote and see what happens, buddy.  Your "oh my god jews wont be superior anymore" fear is about as impressive as Strom Thurmans.




Indeed, maybe you could be ironic as fuck again and complain about namecalling.. by namecalling.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 29, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Fine company if you ask me. I may not agree with you on everything, But I respect your opinions a lot more than MR childish name caller! If he wanted to be taken seriously you would think he would act more like an adult.



Why don't you go ahead and tell her WHAT MAKES YOU JEWISH, dude.. your faith or your ETHNICITY?



hey, demonize me again and cry that the sky is falling, chicken litter.  Ravi may be too stupid to see how you avoid the tough questions but you and I both know how bad you are being PWNED on this issue...


----------



## Ravi (Jul 29, 2008)

It's not a tough question, it's a stupid an pointless one that does nothing more than highlight your own racist tendencies.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 29, 2008)

THATS your retort?  calling ME the racist while rationalizing for israel what you cannot rationalize for any other ethnicity?




this is why your input is so CUTE ravi.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 29, 2008)

José;731117 said:
			
		

> You know what, Rhys
> 
> Ive already lost all hope to understand the mind of super patriotic american clowns.
> 
> ...



Worse, I think, José:  they regard the fact that the European Jews were shockingly treated as a REASON for them to go and treat as badly some other people who never did them any harm at all, then call those ill-treated Semites anti-Semitic for resisting racist oppression.   They are a remarkable folk, those pro-zionists, probably extra-terrestrial.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 29, 2008)

editec said:


> If by the term "Reichlette" you are referring to Isreal, then no, Witchcraft or Philogiston (which I presume is some word for a different Palestine) really doesn't make sense. People can learn from history, they can forgive history, but they cannot forget it.
> 
> The Jews of Isreal cannot forget the holocaust, and the Palesinians cannot forget their more recent diaspora. They once lived in a place they think of a Palestine. Where is _their _home? Where are their olive groves?
> 
> That's the crux of the problem, isn't it?



If the zionists were saying  (as some did, in the early days), 'Oh God, this is awful;  we are forced to it, but we shall put it right', I could have some sympathy.   In fact, the politicians and propagandists strike grossly self-righteous attitudes, and lie all the time about the history of both the territory and their take-over.

Phlogiston was an imagined element which early scientists conjured up to explain fire;  it resembles the concept 'race' in that there is no evidence for its existence.



editec said:


> Two victimized peoples squabbling over one land while we who are above the fray egg them on, or chastise them for finding themselves in that impossible position.
> 
> I try to imagine what might have happened if the Jews of Europe and the Arabs of Palestine could have found some way to become one people, a people in that single state solution that people like Shogun imagine the international community can forge for them, now.
> 
> ...



The problem here, editec, is that you are taking the two as somehow _equal_, in just the way we are all trained to do.   In fact ONE has all the wealth and power, a huge propaganda machine, a very efficient censorship mechanism in AIPAC (which has got me banned from many a discusssion board, incidentally) and above all, enormous subsidies and total diplomatic support from the one remaining superpower.   All things are possible, always, but a proper settlement here only when the US stops supporting the most extremely fanatical nazis left on earth and people can begin to talk.



editec said:


> We've got to work with what we've got _on the ground, today._
> 
> We've GOT to imagine the point of view not only of the most rational Israelis and Palestinians, but of the most irrational of both sides, too, and we've got to find some way to accomodate all of them.
> 
> ...



I think that, first, those with the power to act must listen to those who have the support of the majority in their own community.   On all the evidence, Palestine is represented by Hamas.   Just as the 'extremes' in Northern Ireland had to negotiate before peace was possible, so it is in Palestine/Israel.   Colonialist games of deciding who is 'moderate' enough to be allowed to speak won't work, not ever.



editec said:


> But THEY, the people of Isreal and the people of Palestine have GOT to be the people to make their peace.
> 
> The "international community" is the root source of their problem to begin with. Let's all try to remember, that, shall we?
> 
> ...



The 'International Community' can only guarantee a peace reached between those involved.   If the US would cease to meddle, this might be possible, especially with EU help.   At the moment, the occupiers' propaganda dominates to such an extent that _nothing_ is possible.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 29, 2008)

editec said:


> I can certainly understand why you advocate for a _single_ truly democratic representational goverment in the place some call Isreal and others call Palestine.
> 
> I think you are expecting a people, a people who are convinced that creating such a truly democratic nation would amount to mass suicide, to ignore the obvious fact that there one shitload of Palestinians who hate them (perhaps with just cause, I might add) enough to kill them.
> 
> ...



Well, you know what?  I dont really give a fuck if jews think it would be mass suicide.  WHY?  Because whitey thought the same goddamn thing and here we are a better nation for our EQUALITY.  Palis woulnd't HATE them anymore than BLACKS HATE WHITE PEOPLE now that we dont keep them in the fucking cotton field.  White plantation owners made that same fear their abiding reason to perpetuate racism in the south 100 years after the Emancipation Proclamation.  You'll have to excuse me for not giving a fuck about excuses that perpetuate the same shit in the mid east.

muslims didn't create the holocuast.  And they sure as fuck should pay the price for some mass PTSD.


I understand the pints of view.  Hell, I UNDERSTAND the reason Strom Thurman filibustered, Wallace stood his ground, and germans boycotted jews in germany.  But that, in no way shape or form validates or even comes CLOSE to making me rationlize the racist bullshit.  This is not a "do what I say not as I do" moment.  If you cant fathom racism for Aryans, and I sure as fuck dont, then you cant for jews.. which provides all these pathetic ass scarlet A's from mental pussies who have nothing else but shit talking to reach for in the face of the RACISM that they know damn well is evident.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 29, 2008)

What ever Shog, White Americans never faced the possiblity of all of the sudden becoming a small minority in the Nations. If a single state solution is ever brought about, that is exactly what the Jews in Isreal would face. Your comparisons to the US have no meaning because it is an entirely different situation. The fact that you will not even admit that, is why so many people think you simply do not care what would happen to the Jews in Israel.


----------



## José (Jul 29, 2008)

Aside for Rhys (totally off topic, skip it if you dont share my interest in celtic languages, peoples and culture)

Rhys

I must confess my fascination with your native language. Perhaps as a native speaker of Welsh you dont know how your idiom is seen by outsiders so I would like to share my impression with you.

The first thing that strikes a foreign is the lack of any familiar reference in Celtic languages, I know there are many anglicisms that were incorporated but Im referring to the native words of the language. Even though it is a Indo European language there seems to be no link with the two branches of Indo European languages most of us are familiar with: the Latin and the Germanic branches.

So you cant even begin to imagine the feeling of strangeness your tongue provokes in most of us and I say this in a positive way because out of this strangeness it produces comes part of our fascination, at least in my case. Besides the place occupied by vowels and consonants are also so diferent from anything we are used to see.

Twll dîn pob Sais!

Byddan nhw ddim ond yn cysgu pan fydd angen.

But this is only part of the story, Rhys. When we shift our attention from the language itself and realise that we are in front of the historical evolution of the mother tongue of Druids and all the other elements of celtic society our mind is simply blown away.

The original celtic peoples are not some obscure group of humans who lived in the past like so many others because Asterix brought the ancient Celts, their society and life style back to life. So when we see your mother tongue we are immediately transported to the ancient environment were the original celtic language was spoken. 

So its a fascinating experience to see any text written in your language, Rhys, and I cant even fathom how fascinating would be to hear a native speaker.

I sincerely hope the Welsh people succeds in reviving the Welsh language completely because even though it is associated with welsh nationalism, it belongs in reality to the entire world. It is part of the cultural heritage of our species and it would be a crime to allow not only the Welsh but all the other celtic languages still alive to die out.


----------



## José (Jul 29, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> Two victimized peoples squabbling over one land while we who are above the fray egg them on, or chastise them for finding themselves in that impossible position.



This line clearly shows your inability to see the supremacist nature of what is going on in Palestine. A conflict between equals would be english and french settlers disputing Canadá or a territorial dispute between América and Rússia over an uninhabited piece of ice in Antarctica.

In palestine we have an ethnic group keeping the natives of the land in ethnic enclaves, a group of human beings denying another group their right to live in their homeland.

What&#8217;s the difference between:

1) &#8211; An Indian being denied his right to leave the reservation in America during the first half of the last century.

1) &#8211; A black South African prevented from leaving Transkei, Ciskei or any other pseudo republic set up by the south african government.

1) &#8211; A palestinian living in Gaza, born in pre-Israel Ashkhelon, being prevented from returning to his place of origin?

Absolutely none.

Anyone with even a cursory knowledge on political science will immediately recognise the three aforementioned states as racial dictatorships.



> Originally posted by *editec*
> We've got to work with what we've got on the ground, today.
> 
> We've GOT to imagine the point of view not only of the most rational Israelis and Palestinians, but of the most irrational of both sides, too, and we've got to find some way to accomodate all of them.



Rationalisation and sugar coating of legalised racism in Palestine.



> Originally posted by *editec*
> The moderates among the Palestinians and the Isrealis (and I believe they exist in numbers far larger than any of us are lead to believe) need the world's support.
> 
> Sadly this is not an age of moderation.



Even more rationalisation and sugar coating of legalised racism in Palestine.

The problem here is that since the end of WWII Jews enjoy the status of the super victims of human History and because of this you&#8217;re willing to allow them to do in Palestine something you would never accept in America.

Stop being afraid to say racism is racism. Stop using words like &#8220;moderation&#8221;, &#8220;rational&#8221; to embellish what amounts to racial discrimination. Don&#8217;t be afraid to say it is wrong to keep the people of palestine locked up behind ethnic enclaves.


----------



## José (Jul 29, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> But THEY, the people of Isreal and the people of Palestine have GOT to be the people to make their peace.
> 
> The "international community" is the root source of their problem to begin with. Let's all try to remember, that, shall we?
> ...



This is the attitude the international community has been adopting since 1948. Let&#8217;s watch the sad spectacle of a first world country keeping the natives of the land herded into ethnic enclaves and killing those who try to fight back.

What was the result of this approach? Hundreds of thousand of jews and arabs dead, two american skyscrappers knocked down with thousands of americans inside them and the deepest international crisis since the Cuban missile crisis.

If you have a purulent infection do you wait sixty years for it to heal itself or do you go to a hospital before it spreads to the rest of your body?

Thomas Friedman, who have no lost love for the Palestinian people, said in his column:

*&#8220;A new generation of arabs and muslims growing up seeing the images of palestinian children killed by israeli missiles represent an enormous danger to America.&#8221;*

1) A new generation of arabs/muslims full of anger towards the West attacks America.

2) America reacts by invading yet another arab/muslim country.

3) Arab/Muslim countries do what any other SANE government would: they start building a nuclear deterrence against the US (in fact, Iran, Syria and Egypt are already developing nuclear programs).

4) Nuclear materials and knowledge spread throughout the Middle East and eventually fall into the hands of we know damn well who.

This is a recipe for total disaster. Do nothing and let this conflict perpetuate itself in the future is beyond insane. It could be apropriately called &#8220;*THE OSTRICH STRATEGY*&#8221;.

As I said, the main obstacle to the end of this conflict is the lack of political will on the part of the world to intervene and create a state that can guarantee the rights of the palestinian people and the safety of the jewish population.

But this lack of political will does not change the fact that this ommision is *CRIMINAL* and will be partly responsible for the nuclearization of the ME and an eventual nuclear attack on América (of course, the entire ME needs reforms not only Israel). 

No political scientist with a bare modicum of sanity can find a place in the world where international intervention is more desperately needed than in Palestine.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Jose, do you believe the twin towers were attacked by Arabs for retaliation on behalf of the Palestinians? 

If so, do you believe if we force Israel to give equal access to Palestinians that we will no longer be targeted by extremist Muslims?


----------



## José (Jul 30, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> Yeah, then the lesson needs to include how PROPAGANDA AND INTIMIDATION convinced decent people to go along (even if as non participants) in this crime against humanity.
> 
> The solution to governments going rogue to not to titillate us with what they did, but how they got away with it.
> ...



Its almost unvelievable you were the author of the message I quoted above, editec.

You wrote a message urging people to stay alert and denounce any signs of ethnic supremacism and then you make up excuses when confronted with a state racist to the core that herded the native people of Palestine into ethnic enclaves just like the nazis did!!!

You criticise the passivity and the silence of the german society towards the discrimination of european jews and then you display the same passive acceptance and even rationalisation of the mistreatment of the palestinian people that would put a german to shame!! Germans lived under a dictatorship but you dont even have this excuse.

You say propaganda convinced people to look the other way to the abuses against blacks, indians and jews and then you swallow the zionist propaganda hook, line and sinker!!

If you want to understand what led to the social acceptance of racist states in America, South Africa and Germany you should look yourself in the mirror. Youre a perfect example of all the things you described in your message. You should be the first one to reread your post and follow your own advice. 

Maybe your post needs to be explained to you *in a way that makes you stop thinking this can never happen to you*, editec.


----------



## José (Jul 30, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Ravi*
> Jose, do you believe the twin towers were attacked by Arabs for retaliation on behalf of the Palestinians?



Well, the article I posted on Mohammed Atta speaks for itself, doesnt it? 

Palestine is often called Al Qaedas recruitment office for a good reason.



> Originally posted by *Ravi*
> If so, do you believe if we force Israel to give equal access to Palestinians that we will no longer be targeted by extremist Muslims?



Absolutely not, Ravi.

Lets call the peaceful dismantlement of Israel the Wests part.

But if Iran, Saudi Arabia etc... do not reform their religious and political structures as well as their their educational system that work as an automated machine churning out fundamentalists who hate the West not for what the West does (in Palestine) but for what the West is, then the changes in Palestine will have a negligible effect on terrorism.

All these political reforms should occur at the same time to have a significant impact.

Anyway, the total elimination of terrorism is as utopian as a 0% crime rate. The democratization of Palestine coupled with structural changes in the iranian, saudi societies, among others, would greatly reduce this threat but the truth is that you can always find a couple of shitheads willing to hate the US for all the wrong reasons.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> What ever Shog, White Americans never faced the possiblity of all of the sudden becoming a small minority in the Nations. If a single state solution is ever brought about, that is exactly what the Jews in Isreal would face. Your comparisons to the US have no meaning because it is an entirely different situation. The fact that you will not even admit that, is why so many people think you simply do not care what would happen to the Jews in Israel.



no, it's not just "whatever" after I've handed your ass to you.  You can't generalize all whites just you can't generalize ALL jews.  Trying to do so just illustrates which of us is the raging fucking racist.

And that lil 10% of the knesset proves that your paranoid ethnic cleansing criteria of dead jewish babies in the teeth of every pali is exactly what it sounds like: total bullshit.

Of COURSE you don't want to compare israel to anything else.  It;s the exact DOUBLE STANDARD that i've talked about since day one.  It's that BLANK CHECK you want for israel that I've mentioned time and again.  Indeed, it's not your dual citizensip that makes you a fucking racist zionist; it's your perspective on rationalizing racist for the sake of YOUR team that gives yu that crown.

And, I wont admit it because I"VE got history on my side, sucker..  IM not the one trying to pretend that jews are superhuman than everyone else through the entire fucking recorded history of mankind.  If not accepting your racism is all it takes to make you call back on Ole Trusty then so be it.  Germans had the same excuses you do.  and I'm not impressed with either.


Now go ahead and insist that i want to see dead jews instead of liberty and equality for ALL people in that area.  Your propaganda nonsense is transparent as fuck as is your reason for not admitting to Ravi that it's not your dogma that makes you jewish.  



zionism =  HATE 100% of the time.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

HERE is your "whatever" Chuck.  Enjoy watching what you cause and try not to cry apples and oranges too loud.  I realize being the new MASTE, er, CHOSEN race gives you superhuman consideration and all but...

* Boy killed in West Bank protest*

Israeli troops have shot dead a 12-year-old Palestinian boy during a protest against Israel's barrier in the occupied West Bank, medics say.

The Israeli military said it was investigating what had happened.

It happened at Nilin village, west of Ramallah, where peace activists say Israel is taking 25 hectares of land from villagers to build the barrier.

The Israeli army is replacing the main access road to the village with a tunnel under military control.

Activists say the plan will have the effect of turning Nilin into a prison. Israel says the barrier and other construction work is necessary for security reasons.

'Serious' inquiry

The boy was identified by local organisers of the anti-barrier protest as Hamad Musa, AFP reported.

He was hit in the head by a live bullet fired by Israeli soldiers and died of his wounds while being transported to hospital, Palestinian medical sources said.

One activist told AFP the army dispersed protesters near the barrier using rubber-coated bullets and tear gas, and then fired live rounds at people gathering in the village.

An Israeli military spokeswoman said the army was carrying out a "serious" joint inquiry with Palestinian officials, in quotes carried by the AFP news agency.

Fifteen people were also reported injured by rubber-coated bullets during the demonstration. 

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Boy killed in West Bank protest


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

José;732008 said:
			
		

> Well, the article I posted on Mohammed Atta speaks for itself, doesnt it?
> 
> Palestine is often called Al Qaedas recruitment office for a good reason.
> 
> ...



I don't recall the article, but I imagine he says that was his excuse? I don't buy the ravings of someone I consider insane. IMO, they use every thing they can to justify themselves because it sells, just like the use the Koran to justify themselves.

I think blaming the WTC attacks on Arabs in general is wrong.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 30, 2008)

José;731766 said:
			
		

> Aside for Rhys (totally off topic, skip it if you don&#8217;t share my interest in celtic languages, peoples and culture)
> 
> Rhys
> 
> ...



Jose - I think there is a relationship to Latin.   As I understand it, the Italic from which Latin developed was a close cousin to early Celtic.   I think this is more evident with Irish, which kept its inflexions.   I believe 'of a cow' is 'bovis' in both languages, for instance.   With our language you can see some regular changes in comparison with Latin 'h' for their 's', for instance.   They said 'sol' for sun, we say 'haul' (sounds like 'hyle').   What I find very interesting is that Cymraeg labels the bits of the colour spectrum differently from English.   The colour 'glas', for instance, in much wider than the English 'blue', embracing a lot of 'green'.   In the past this was even more marked:  I think most of the colours were different in range.



			
				José;731766 said:
			
		

> So you can&#8217;t even begin to imagine the feeling of strangeness your tongue provokes in most of us and I say this in a positive way because out of this strangeness it produces comes part of our fascination, at least in my case. Besides the place occupied by vowels and consonants are also so diferent from anything we are used to see.
> 
> Twll dîn pob Sais!
> 
> Byddan nhw ddim ond yn cysgu pan fydd angen..



Da iawn, José.   Where did you learn those?




			
				José;731766 said:
			
		

> But this is only part of the story, Rhys. When we shift our attention from the language itself and realise that we are in front of the historical evolution of the mother tongue of Druids and all the other elements of celtic society our mind is simply blown away.
> 
> The original celtic peoples are not some obscure group of humans who lived in the past like so many others because Asterix brought the ancient Celts, their society and life style back to life. So when we see your mother tongue we are immediately transported to the ancient environment were the original celtic language was spoken.
> 
> So it&#8217;s a fascinating experience to see any text written in your language, Rhys, and I can&#8217;t even fathom how fascinating would be to hear a native speaker.



Try BBC Arlein - http://news.bbc.co.uk.welsh.hi.newsid
BBC Catchphrase - a learning programme
or S4C - http.www.s4c.co.uk/c-watch

I am bad at copying , but you should be able to Google these.




			
				José;731766 said:
			
		

> I sincerely hope the Welsh people succeds in reviving the Welsh language completely because even though it is associated with welsh nationalism, it belongs in reality to the entire world. It is part of the cultural heritage of our species and it would be a crime to allow not only the Welsh but all the other celtic languages still alive to die out.



Thanks.   As far as our language goes, things are looking up.   The long civil-disobedience struggle of the Language Society, Cymdeithas yr Iaith, has meant that the language has pretty much equal status, now, a status guaranteed by our Assembly, which we now call the Senedd, Parliament;   Welsh-language secondary schools are hugely successful in what were mainly English-speaking areas;  we have our own television service, Sianel Pedwar Cymru, and the number speaking the language, which was down to 18%, is nearer 30% amongst the younger people.   Our main problem, as with all local communities, is that in the _bro Gymraeg_, the Welsh-speaking areas, outsiders buy up the houses (we have the misfortune - at least in this sense - to live in a very beautiful country) but for the moment the mortgage crisis is dealing with _that_.   It was fabulous, a few weeks back, to go round what used to be called 'little England' in south Pembrokeshire and see our flag flying everywhere, and bi-lingual notices in the supermarkets.   Another interesting thing is that in parts of England you also see bi-lingual notices their authorities having bought roadsigns cheap:  they were replaced because the English came first!   It is all still quite touchy, but relaxing more and more.

About the other Celtic countries I can't be as hopeful, but that is another story and I've not much time - I'm off to meet a Patagonian relative who is coming over to Cardiff for the National Eisteddfod.   But I am very pleased that you take an interest in this subject, José.   Pob llwyddiant.   Rhys


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I don't recall the article, but I imagine he says that was his excuse? I don't buy the ravings of someone I consider insane. IMO, they use every thing they can to justify themselves because it sells, just like the use the Koran to justify themselves.
> 
> I think blaming the WTC attacks on Arabs in general is wrong.



wow.


every word of that post is ironic as fuck.  So, let's go ahead and ignore the blatant clusterfuck that is the purposeful misinterpretation of the iranian presidents quote because Ravi thinks he's crazy and just want to kill jews.

*
Text of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Speech*

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/w...66800&en=5035dfc8b7afc70d&ei=5070&oref=slogin


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

It's a shame you don't have any idea what you're saying. I hope Jose doesn't approve of you speaking for him, what an embarrassment.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 30, 2008)

Just butting in to say that I think _Why I Don't Post Here_ has got to be one of the best thread titles ever. Especially for a thread with soooooo many posts.


----------



## manifold (Jul 30, 2008)

Terrorist sympathizer say what?


----------



## Anguille (Jul 30, 2008)

pocket pool shark play what?


----------



## manifold (Jul 30, 2008)

Damn! caught in the act again!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

So terrorist sympathizers turn you on?


----------



## manifold (Jul 30, 2008)

Methinks someone should mind her own business.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

lol, why start now?


----------



## Paulie (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I'm not even sure why he'd think a convert to Judaism would be excluded from *living in Israel*. That'd kind of nullify the entire purpose of conversion. Like the pope telling YOU if you converted to Catholicism that you'd be eligible for all the bennies but you couldn't *visit the Vatican*.



Digging deep here for the pure fun of it..

Isn't there a bit of a difference between immigrating into a country and then permanently living there, and VISITING a place for the purpose of a worship?

How many Christian converts settle in the Vatican?  How many even entertain such an idea, let alone think they're ENTITLED to?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> Digging deep here for the pure fun of it..
> 
> Isn't there a bit of a difference between immigrating into a country and then permanently living there, and VISITING a place for the purpose of a worship?
> 
> How many Christian converts settle in the Vatican?  How many even entertain such an idea, let alone think they're ENTITLED to?


Hey, all you have to do is become a priest, be celibate (at least pretend) and have contacts.


----------



## manifold (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Hey, all you have to do is become a priest, be celibate (at least pretend) and have contacts.




contacts with alter boys you mean?


----------



## Paulie (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Hey, all you have to do is become a priest, be celibate (at least pretend) and have contacts.



Far more requirements than for "jews" to settle in Israel.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> Far more requirements than for "jews" to settle in Israel.



Maybe. You'd have to convert and get circumsized, I bet. Keep kosher, all that good stuff. Drink that horrible wine. ;0

It's a toss up.

I'm happy living in a country that doesn't have any religious requirements.


----------



## Paulie (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Maybe. You'd have to convert and get circumsized, I bet. Keep kosher, all that good stuff. Drink that horrible wine. ;0
> 
> It's a toss up.
> 
> I'm happy living in a country that doesn't have any religious requirements.



Yeah, try being an atheist here and running for president.  Sure, it's not an OFFICIAL requirement...but...


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> Yeah, try being an atheist here and running for president.  Sure, it's not an OFFICIAL requirement...but...


It will happen one day.


----------



## manifold (Jul 30, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> Yeah, try being an atheist here and running for president.  Sure, it's not an OFFICIAL requirement...but...



Or a Mormon.


----------



## Paulie (Jul 30, 2008)

manifold said:


> Or a Mormon.



That self-professed mormon got farther than any self-professed atheist would ever get.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I'm happy living in a country that doesn't have any religious requirements.



We do have some, for example to serve on jury in my state you must "swear to God".


----------



## manifold (Jul 30, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> That self-professed mormon got farther than any self-professed atheist would ever get.



Horse shoes and hand grenades brother, horse shoes and hand grenades.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Anguille said:


> We do have some, for example to serve on jury in my state you must "swear to God".


That's hard to believe. I thought you could abstain if you weren't a believer. Where do you live, Idaho?


----------



## Paulie (Jul 30, 2008)

Anguille said:


> We do have some, for example to serve on jury in my state you must "swear to God".



Is it an easy way out?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> Is it an easy way out?



lol, I didn't think of that. It must get abused all the time.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 30, 2008)

Paulitics said:


> Is it an easy way out?



I don't know. Last time was called for jury duty my jury pool was dismissed before I got called before the judge to tell her that I would make a very fair and honest juror but I would not be able to perform religious acts as part of my service. 

I'd love to be on a jury, btw. Maybe next time.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Anguille said:


> I don't know. Last time was called for jury duty my jury pool was dismissed before I got called before the judge to tell her that I would make a very fair and honest juror but I would not be able to perform religious acts as part of my service.
> 
> I'd love to be on a jury, btw. Maybe next time.



I don't believe you for a minute. What type of religious acts...making wine from water?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> It's a shame you don't have any idea what you're saying. I hope Jose doesn't approve of you speaking for him, what an embarrassment.



I claimed to speak for JOSE?

*quote me.  provide the post #.*


Did I just bust your ass for ANOTHER round of blatany lying when the facts loomed over your stupidity?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

I have to say.. it's fucking HILARIOUS to see the same bag of stupidity proclaim that they are glad they live in a place where there is no religious requirement.... not even 5 posts after rationalizing an ethnic AND religious requirement for the state of isreal.


RICH, lemme tellya.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I claimed to speak for JOSE?
> 
> *quote me.  provide the post #.*
> 
> ...



Calm down, you answered a question I posed to Jose. I might not agree with Jose, but he's not an idiot like you are.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I don't believe you for a minute. What type of religious acts...making wine from water?



Swearing to God is a religious act, in my opinion. I have yet to find out what a judge would say to a potential juror that promises to fulfill all the duties and responsibilities of a juror except for swearing to God that to promise to fulfill them. I was very curious as to what the judge would have responded. I'm sure it has come up before. I wonder if it is an issue or not and if people have been turned down or excused as potential jurors for refusing to swear to God. If that has happened, then I would say it was a violation of the separation of Church and State and evidence that this country has religious requirements.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Calm down, you answered a question I posed to Jose. I might not agree with Jose, but he's not an idiot like you are.


*
I hope Jose doesn't approve of you speaking for him, what an embarrassment.
Reply With Quote*


HA!


I DID just bust your ass trying to deflect with outright lies!





See, THIS is what seperates your pathetic input from my mud hole stomping input.  At least I can manage to be both consistent AND* honest*


Hey, I bet calling me some names will erase you LIE!


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL>


you stupid ****.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I don't believe you for a minute. What type of religious acts...making wine from water?



You are a misinformed cynic if you don't believe I want to serve on a jury. I always have. In the past I've been excused because a jury gets impaneled before my number is called. Oh, once I made it in to the jury box but one of the lawyers chose  not to have me. They don't tell you why. This last time was the first time I ever raised my hand when the judge asked if anyone had any religious reasons that would affect their ability to be on a jury. In the past I've just remained silent when asked as part of the jury pool to raise your hand and swear to god, blah blah blah.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

i still love that avatar pic, ang.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Swearing to God is a religious act, in my opinion. I have yet to find out what a judge would say to a potential juror that promises to fulfill all the duties and responsibilities of a juror except for swearing to God that to promise to fulfill them. I was very curious as to what the judge would have responded. I'm sure it has come up before. I wonder if it is an issue or not and if people have been turned down or excused as potential jurors for refusing to swear to God. If that has happened, then I would say it was a violation of the separation of Church and State and evidence that this country has religious requirements.


I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure you don't have to swear on a bible to be a juror. People taking the stand do, maybe you're getting being on a jury confused with all those times you've been arrested.



The judge would probably throw you out of the jury pool for being a crackpot.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Shogun said:


> *
> I hope Jose doesn't approve of you speaking for him, what an embarrassment.
> Reply With Quote*
> 
> ...



Answering a question that I asked Jose is you speaking for him, pretty much.

I'm still trying to figure out your savant specialty...could it be you know the taxonomy of all MO weeds?


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Anguille said:


> You are a misinformed cynic if you don't believe I want to serve on a jury. I always have. In the past I've been excused because a jury gets impaneled before my number is called. Oh, once I made it in to the jury box but one of the lawyers chose  not to have me. They don't tell you why. This last time was the first time I ever raised my hand when the judge asked if anyone had any religious reasons that would affect their ability to be on a jury. In the past I've just remained silent when asked as part of the jury pool to raise your hand and swear to god, blah blah blah.


The part I don't believe is that you'd be required to swear on a bible to be on a jury. He was probably trying to find out if you objected to the death penalty or something similar.


----------



## editec (Jul 30, 2008)

José;731769 said:
			
		

> This is the attitude the international community has been adopting since 1948. Lets watch the sad spectacle of a first world country keeping the natives of the land herded into ethnic enclaves and killing those who try to fight back.


 
Since the League of Nations created the mandate system, more like. When was that 1919, or so?

The international community caused this mess. 

Neither team on either side of the wire is likely to ever really trust the international community again... nor should they.

Basically all that misleading term means (or ever meant) is the most powerful nations at the time, who unite to impose their will on lesser nations.



> What was the result of this approach? Hundreds of thousand of jews and arabs dead, two american skyscrappers knocked down with thousands of americans inside them and the deepest international crisis since the Cuban missile crisis.


 
Yes.



> If you have a purulent infection do you wait sixty years for it to heal itself or do you go to a hospital before it spreads to the rest of your body?


 
If you get an STD, do you return to the unclean source who gave it to you to get cured? 

NO?

Well, that's who gave that unhappy land the STD that is killing it. 





> Thomas Friedman, who have no lost love for the Palestinian people, said in his column:
> 
> *A new generation of arabs and muslims growing up seeing the images of palestinian children killed by israeli missiles represent an enormous danger to America.*


 

But of course. And a new generation of Jewish Israeli and Palestinians children are growing up with the sound of bombs going off in their homeland, and most of them being told that the other team is _completely _responsible.

_Sins of the fathers,_ and all that, eh?



> 1) A new generation of arabs/muslims full of anger towards the West attacks America.
> 
> 2) America reacts by invading yet another arab/muslim country.
> 
> ...


 

So I guess that whole "they hate us for our freedoms" summation of why 9-11 happened didn't resonate so well with you, eh?

Me neither 



> As I said, the main obstacle to the end of this conflict is the lack of political will on the part of the world to intervene and create a state that can guarantee the rights of the palestinian people and the safety of the jewish population.


 
Intervene how? By invading Israel and the PA. Yeah, that'll work.

Wait a minute, all irony aside ...maybe it will. 

Maybe the Jews and Arabs will work together to throw the international community interlopers out of their land, just so they can go back to their family squabbling in peace.




> But this lack of political will does not change the fact that this ommision is *CRIMINAL* and will be partly responsible for the nuclearization of the ME and an eventual nuclear attack on América (of course, the entire ME needs reforms not only Israel).


 
Maybe they just don't want to BE like us. Must we force our way on life on everyone?



I live in this land and I love it, too. Still, I sincerely wish more of us didn't want to be like us, either. 



> No political scientist with a bare modicum of sanity can find a place in the world where international intervention is more desperately needed than in Palestine.


 
I'm a political scientist. Perhaps I lack that modicum of sanity.

I think the last thing that place needs is more boots (or sandles) on the ground.

That would be a total diaster, I think.

It's a shame, of course, but no nation is willing to let the bluehelmets run things unless there is no viable government left to object.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> *Answering a question that I asked Jose is you speaking for him, pretty much.*
> 
> I'm still trying to figure out your savant specialty...could it be you know the taxonomy of all MO weeds?



no, it's really not Ravikins.


and, if IM a savant then you are the primordial ooze stuck in the ass crack of cthullu.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

Edetic, for all your other input on this forum you are on the WRONG side of this one, buddy.

And, regarding your STD allusion, you DO sure as hell take into consideration what activity it was that landed you those spots on your dick and keep from acting in like manner until you get Aids.  OR, you marry the bitch that gave you syphillis and don't spread your disease to your net potential GF.  Many, MANY examples that illustrate how lacking is your STD analogy.


----------



## Charles_Main (Jul 30, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Edetic, for all your other input on this forum you are on the WRONG side of this one, buddy.
> 
> And, regarding your STD allusion, you DO sure as hell take into consideration what activity it was that landed you those spots on your dick and keep from acting in like manner until you get Aids.  OR, you marry the bitch that gave you syphillis and don't spread your disease to your net potential GF.  Many, MANY examples that illustrate how lacking is your STD analogy.



Just ask Shog and Jose, because the have the best interests of all in their hearts. NOT, lol.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 30, 2008)

Ravi said:


> The part I don't believe is that you'd be required to swear on a bible to be on a jury. He was probably trying to find out if you objected to the death penalty or something similar.



Where in my posts do I say I was asked to swear on a Bible? Please don't confuse the issue. I was asked along with all the other people called to jury duty and to repeat an oath to God. Something about promising to fulfill my duties as a juror if called to perform jury duty. 

There is no death penalty in my state. The judge, and it was a she not a he, asked that anyone in the jury pools who had a question about their ability to perform jury duty for whatever reason; family issues, knowing the defendant, work issues, religious or health issues, please raise their hand. Quite a lot of people raised their hands and our names were put on a list. As our numbers were called and we were asked to come forward so that the defense and the prosecution could consider for approval as jurors, if we our name was on that, we then had the opportunity to discuss our particular issue with the judge. Like I said, a jury was chosen before my number ever got called so I have no idea what the judge would have said if I told her it was against my beliefs to swear to God as part of a courtroom procedure and that I believed I was nonetheless in every way capable of being an impartial and competent juror.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 30, 2008)

Shogun said:


> i still love that avatar pic, ang.



I know you do, Gluegun. I keep it up just for you.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 30, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Where in my posts do I say I was asked to swear on a Bible? Please don't confuse the issue. I was asked along with all the other people called to jury duty and to repeat an oath to God. Something about promising to fulfill my duties as a juror if called to perform jury duty.
> 
> There is no death penalty in my state. The judge, and it was a she not a he, asked that anyone in the jury pools who had a question about their ability to perform jury duty for whatever reason; family issues, knowing the defendant, work issues, religious or health issues, please raise their hand. Quite a lot of people raised their hands and our names were put on a list. As our numbers were called and we were asked to come forward so that the defense and the prosecution could consider for approval as jurors, if we our name was on that, we then had the opportunity to discuss our particular issue with the judge. Like I said, a jury was chosen before my number ever got called so I have no idea what the judge would have said if I told her it was against my beliefs to swear to God as part of a courtroom procedure and that I believed I was nonetheless in every way capable of being an impartial and competent juror.



Maybe I misunderstood you, but you did say:

We do have some, for example to serve on jury in my state you must "swear to God".


----------



## Shogun (Jul 30, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> Just ask Shog and Jose, because the have the best interests of all in their hearts. NOT, lol.



Indeed we do.  I wouldnt expect a guy with a hebrew fixation to to understand that goyim are humans too.


----------



## José (Jul 31, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Anguille*
> Swearing to God is a religious act, in my opinion. I have yet to find out what a judge would say to a potential juror that promises to fulfill all the duties and responsibilities of a juror except for swearing to God that to promise to fulfill them. I was very curious as to what the judge would have responded. I'm sure it has come up before. I wonder if it is an issue or not and if people have been turned down or excused as potential jurors for refusing to swear to God. If that has happened, then I would say it was a violation of the separation of Church and State and evidence that this country has religious requirements.



Shame on America and the rest of the world where this *MEDIEVAL VIOLENCE* is allowed to happen, Anguille.



> Originally posted by *Ravi*
> I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure you don't have to swear on a bible to be a juror. People taking the stand do, maybe you're getting being on a jury confused with all those times you've been arrested.


Either way this is inconceivable in a secular state, Ravi. These theological leftovers from the time the US was founded must be finally discarded for the sake of the pluralistic society that exists today in America (in fact, just 1 non-religious citizen would be enough).


----------



## José (Jul 31, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Rhys*
> Try BBC Arlein - http://news.bbc.co.uk.welsh.hi.newsid
> BBC Catchphrase - a learning programme
> or S4C - http.www.s4c.co.uk/c-watch
> ...



The links didnt work, I googled Catchphrase but I didnt have the program to play the sound files and BBC Arlein is entirely in Welsh... couldnt understand a word : )

Then I found this at another site:

*Genir pawb yn rhydd ac yn gydradd â'i gilydd mewn urddas a hawliau. Fe'u cynysgaeddir â rheswm a chydwybod, a dylai pawb ymddwyn y naill at y llall mewn ysbryd cymodlon.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. 
(Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)*

The sound of your language sent me right back to the magical world of J.R.R. Tolkien, Asterix and all the celtic legends, Rhys. Unfortunately, the only word I could pronounce was cymodlon : )



> Originally posted by *Rhys*
> Thanks. As far as our language goes, things are looking up. The long civil-disobedience struggle of the Language Society, Cymdeithas yr Iaith, has meant that the language has pretty much equal status, now, a status guaranteed by our Assembly, which we now call the Senedd, Parliament; Welsh-language secondary schools are hugely successful in what were mainly English-speaking areas; we have our own television service, Sianel Pedwar Cymru, and the number speaking the language, which was down to 18%, is nearer 30% amongst the younger people. Our main problem, as with all local communities, is that in the bro Gymraeg, the Welsh-speaking areas, outsiders buy up the houses (we have the misfortune - at least in this sense - to live in a very beautiful country) but for the moment the mortgage crisis is dealing with that. It was fabulous, a few weeks back, to go round what used to be called 'little England' in south Pembrokeshire and see our flag flying everywhere, and bi-lingual notices in the supermarkets. Another interesting thing is that in parts of England you also see bi-lingual notices their authorities having bought roadsigns cheap: they were replaced because the English came first! It is all still quite touchy, but relaxing more and more.



Amazing!! Im glad to hear the Welsh language is experiencing such a fantastic revival, Rhys. God knows we already have enough english speakers in this world!!

Maybe its time to rehabilitate the celtic religion, too. I dont mean converting to it just restore its reputation. Correct me if Im wrong but the celtic religion was persecuted, destroyed and unjustly portrayed as devil worship, satanic rituals by the Catholic Church, isnt it?



> Originally posted by *Rhys*
> About the other Celtic countries I can't be as hopeful, but that is another story and I've not much time - I'm off to meet a Patagonian relative who is coming over to Cardiff for the National Eisteddfod. But I am very pleased that you take an interest in this subject, José. Pob llwyddiant. Rhys



Ive read about the welsh settlement in Argentina, Rhys. Probably the last place in the world anyone would expect to find welsh people. The guys created a Little Wales in the middle of the Patagonia desert


----------



## José (Jul 31, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Shogun*
> Edetic, for all your other input on this forum you are on the WRONG side of this one, buddy.
> 
> And, regarding your STD allusion, you DO sure as hell take into consideration what activity it was that landed you those spots on your dick and keep from acting in like manner until you get Aids. OR, you marry the bitch that gave you syphillis and don't spread your disease to your net potential GF. Many, MANY examples that illustrate how lacking is your STD analogy.



Shogun,

Let&#8217;s give editec some credit.

The way he visualises the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as if it were two super powers in equal conditions, the US and the Soviet Union disputing an uninhabited piece of ice in Antarctica, is wrong indeed. It is a typical *invading settlers vs displaced natives* conflict, but regardless of how he views it, his posts are incredibly reasonable compared to Foxfyre&#8217;s.

Foxfyre shamelessly presents the jewish racial dictatorship as the victim of the palestinian people it keeps herded in arab corrals. I sometimes reread his posts several times to see if they are some kind of satires, bad jokes or black humor but the guy really seems to believe what he posts.

It&#8217;s sick, callous, immoral, depraved, pornographic... the english language doesn&#8217;t have enough adjectives to describe his posts. They make me puke. And surprisingly he seems to be a good, gentle individual on a personal level.

Because of the tremendous pro-israel social pressure people in the West/US is subjected to, editec is reluctant to accept the fact that the nature, the structure of the israeli state is the same as South Africa under Apartheid and 19th century America but no one can deny he&#8217;s a compassionate individual.

I&#8217;d take editec&#8217;s posts (or even chuck&#8217;s) over his any day of the week.


----------



## José (Jul 31, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> The international community caused this mess.



True, but dont you think the world community played a positive role in the process of desegregation in South Africa? To tell you the truth, I wouldnt like to see Israel under international pressure, sanctions, embargos like SA. Id like to see the jewish people accepting the desegregation of Palestine as voluntarily as possible. And Im sure the jewish people would get a much better deal including the presence of international troops for as long as they wish. 

Well, *EITHER* I am the only sane person in a madhouse called Planet Earth *OR* the rest of the world is sane and Im the only one fucked up in the head because the mind-boggling inaction of the international community towards a conflict that has *the potential to set off a worldwide nuclear conflagration* is far beyond my comprehension powers and will remain so forever.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 31, 2008)

No one is forced to swear on a bible to become a juror. No one is forced to swear on a bible to give evidence in court, either. People are allowed to swear an oath on something that has meaning to them. 

Anyone that has a problem with that is


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

José;732743 said:
			
		

> ...These theological leftovers from the time the US was founded must be finally discarded for the sake of the pluralistic society that exists today in America (in fact, just 1 non-religious citizen would be enough).



Actually some of these theological leftovers are not actually leftovers. The "In God we Trust" on our currency was added after the Civil War and the "under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance during the McCarthy era.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Jul 31, 2008)

roomy said:


> Not the UK though, we are in the UN but you are right, the UN are arseholes.
> 
> Had I been Jewish The world would owe me big time.Had I been Black, native American, Aborigine, Tasmanian, South American etc, etc the world would owe me big time.Those taking the high road should just learn to shut the fuck up, the Romans, French, Danes and others fucked Britain for centuries, we got over it by kicking their fucking arses back to shitsville, it's what we do, you small town Americans haven't got a clue.Let the Jews be, they have a country, they defend it, they have allies to help them do this.If you don't like it, lump it.You haven't got a moral leg to stand on, given how you live where you do.



I love this guy! Finally, someone who gets it.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 31, 2008)

indeed, the world doesn't owe anyone shit.


It's a little ironic that a BRIT, of all people, would have such a pompous attitude.  Par for the 19th century course, really.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> People are allowed to swear an oath on something that has meaning to them.
> 
> Anyone that has a problem with that is



In my case, everyone in the jury pool was *told* to swear an oath to God. There is a difference between being allowed to do something and being told to do something.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 31, 2008)

Anguille said:


> In my case, everyone in the jury pool was *told* to swear an oath to God. There is a difference between being allowed to do something and being told to do something.


I have a seriously hard time believing this, sorry. Could you find a link to back it up?


----------



## Shogun (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I have a seriously hard time believing this, sorry. Could you find a link to back it up?



oh come ON, ravikins.. are YOU the only person who can use personal non sequiters to "prove" your point?


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I have a seriously hard time believing this, sorry. Could you find a link to back it up?



You're just going to have to take my word for it. Or not, whatever suits your purpose.


----------



## Glori.B (Jul 31, 2008)

Anguille said:


>




ouch!! don't hurt yourself angi


----------



## editec (Jul 31, 2008)

José;732746 said:
			
		

> Shogun,
> 
> Lets give editec some credit.


 
Editec prefers a cash-and-carry reputation, but thank you.




> Because of the tremendous pro-israel social pressure people in the West/US is subjected to, *editec is reluctant to accept the fact that the nature, the structure of the israeli state is the same as South Africa under Apartheid *and 19th century America but no one can deny hes a compassionate individual.


 
No, I am not. 

I am at least as aware of the injustice meted out to the Palestinians (especially those in camps or the PA) as anyone on this board. 

I'd have thought, given all the ASCII I've devoted to this subject, you two would have realized that *my objection isn't with the philosophy, but the application of that idealistic solution.*

I am merely reluctant to impose an idealistic solution on that disasterours place that I think will NOT work _at this time. _

You see.. the proposal to dismiss both the Isreali government and the PA, and impose a just society overseen by an international cabal isn't flawed , except that it assumes that the players on the ground will stand it.

Do you _both _not realize that it was the combined ire (and terrorism and rioting) of both the Zionists AND the Arab brotherhoods which drove out the British in 1948?

These international solutions will NOT work unless the MAJORITY OF PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES DEMAND IT.

We might very well increase the killing if we imposed this international boots on the ground solution on this place, folks.

THAT, and not any confusion about what is going on, is my primary objection. 
[/quote]


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I have a seriously hard time believing this, sorry. Could you find a link to back it up?



Here we go: jury duty question [Archive I] - IIDB

I googled "jury swear to God" and this link came up.

Like I said in an earlier post, I don't think I'm the first person to question why in country with supposedly no religious requirements citizens are expected to swear to God in a court of law and it looks like I'm not.

"Roger Williams (forgotten founder, The | Church & State | Find Articles at BNET) In 1635, Roger Williams was appointed to pastoral duties at the local church in Salem, Mass. Williams, a Puritan preacher who had fled religious persecution in England, was already unpopular in Boston for rebuking civil authorities who seized lands owned by Native Americans, but he promptly waded into another controversy. 

Massachusetts' General Court, the governing authority at the time, required all males over the age of 16 to swear an oath of allegiance to the king of England, ending with "so help me, God." 

Most people didn't see a problem with that. Williams did. To him, the state's use of God's name in a civil oath was far from innocuous. What about the atheists, he argued? Would they be forced to take the oath as well? "A magistrate ought not to tender an oath to an unregenerate man," insisted Williams. Doing so, he contended, would force the non-believer "to take the name of God in vain."

Hey Ravi, if we were made to swear to Allah would that be any different? thh!


----------



## Ravi (Jul 31, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Here we go: jury duty question [Archive I] - IIDB
> 
> I googled "jury swear to God" and this link came up.
> 
> ...



Nice, one link from something that happened before we were a country and another an atheist chat board. I did find this on the chat board:



> They gave every one the "so help me God" oath then requested anyone not taking the oath to remain standing. I imagine that is the point where you can stay standing and ask for another oath. I didn't bother.


I'm still going to wait and see if you have any credible proof that one MUST swear an oath to God to be on a jury.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Nice, one link from something that happened before we were a country and another an atheist chat board. I did find this on the chat board:
> 
> I'm still going to wait and see if you have any credible proof that one MUST swear an oath to God to be on a jury.



Not to jump in the middle of your private little shooting match, but .....

Federal Court Juror's Handbook

The answer to your question lies within the PDF. Of course this is for Federal Court and even within the Federal Court system, it appears there is some variation. Now in state courts, my guess is it really depends on how the judge wants to run his or her courtroom. They have a tendency to act like mini-deities themselves.

You two may now resume your war.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 31, 2008)

Tech_Esq said:


> Not to jump in the middle of your private little shooting match, but .....
> 
> Federal Court Juror's Handbook
> 
> ...



Thanks, but pdf's scare me. 

I found this link, if you scroll down and look at "b" you'll see that in this particular court, one may abstain. I'm willing to bet you are allowed to in any court with a rational group of people in charge. And the court with the irrational people in charge, then a lawsuit may be needed.

N.D.R.Ct. 6.10 Courtroom Oaths


----------



## Tech_Esq (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Thanks, but pdf's scare me.
> 
> I found this link, if you scroll down and look at "b" you'll see that in this particular court, one may abstain. I'm willing to bet you are allowed to in any court with a rational group of people in charge. And the court with the irrational people in charge, then a lawsuit may be needed.
> 
> N.D.R.Ct. 6.10 Courtroom Oaths



PDFs scare you? You must mean in a psychological way because there is nothing executable about a PDF (speaking of course as a Certified Information Systems Security Professional and a Certified Information Systems Auditor). But, no matter, a phobia is a phobia. I respect you no less for it.

If you had looked at the link it would have supported your contention. It allow that in some districts jurors were asked to swear on a Bible rather than with upraised hand, but you should also have the option to affirm in that case as well. Being a Pagan I've never run into an issue where I couldn't affirm instead of swear.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 31, 2008)

Tech_Esq said:


> PDFs scare you? You must mean in a psychological way because there is nothing executable about a PDF (speaking of course as a Certified Information Systems Security Professional and a Certified Information Systems Auditor). But, no matter, a phobia is a phobia. I respect you no less for it.
> 
> If you had looked at the link it would have supported your contention. It allow that in some districts jurors were asked to swear on a Bible rather than with upraised hand, but you should also have the option to affirm in that case as well. Being a Pagan I've never run into an issue where I couldn't affirm instead of swear.


Well, they don't really _scare_ me, they just have been crashing my browser lately. I need to update adobe.

What would a Pagan swear on, if asked?


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Nice, one link from something that happened before we were a country and another an atheist chat board. I did find this on the chat board:
> 
> I'm still going to wait and see if you have any credible proof that one MUST swear an oath to God to be on a jury.



If you had actually read my posts rather than just invent ways to discredit them, you would understand that I never got to ask the judge if a juror must swear to God to serve on jury. I, along with the rest of the jury pool, was told, to stand and repeat an oath which included the words,"swear to God". I stood but remained silent at the swear to God part. The judge next asked for all who had questions about their ability to serve on jury for whatever reason, work or family commitments, health or religious reasons to raise their hands and be put on a list so that they could discuss the issue with her when they were impaneled. I raised my hand and gave my name but was dismissed before I ever reached the jury box because the lawyers chose 12 jurors before my number was called.

So I never got to tell the judge that I had not sworn to god when the bailiff told us all to do so. I never got to ask her if that disqualified me as a juror and why would that be so. Certainly I was never offered an alternative to swearing to God or "given the opportunity" to do so, I was *told *to do so.

I don't think public school students should be made to pray in class and this incident seemed very similar to me. 
I don't think that people should be made to feel they must swear to God in a courtroom. Public schools and United States courtrooms must not have religious affiliations.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Well, they don't really _scare_ me, they just have been crashing my browser lately. I need to update adobe.
> 
> What would a Pagan swear on, if asked?



Oh gotcha, yeah, AR is good for that.

That's a good question. I think that Paganism is diverse enough in its practice that there is no one common think that would suffice for all who call themselves Pagans. Some believe in specific Pantheons of Gods and Goddesses (Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Celtic etc.). In those cases, something symbolic of the appropriate God or Goddess would probably be right. In other cases, people don't specifically break it out like that and the deity(ies) is/are more amorphous than that. I put myself in more of the latter category. If I had more religious discipline I would probably pick a Pantheon because I do see the point, but I've never really gone through the effort.

Back to your point, I'm not sure that there is something you could give me that I would be willing to "swear" on and it would be meaningful as intended by the process.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

Tech_Esq said:


> Not to jump in the middle of your private little shooting match, but .....
> 
> Federal Court Juror's Handbook
> 
> ...



It was a criminal case in a state court. I think you are probably correct when you suggest that it depends on how a judge choses to run his or her court because I recall that other times I've been called to jury duty an oath to God was not always part of the procedure.


----------



## Ravi (Jul 31, 2008)

Anguille said:


> If you had actually read my posts rather than just invent ways to discredit them, you would understand that I never got to ask the judge if a juror must swear to God to serve on jury. I, along with the rest of the jury pool, was told, to stand and repeat and oath which included the words,"swear to God". I stood but remained silent at the swear to God part. The judge next asked for all who had questions about their ability to serve on jury for whatever reason, work or family commitments, health or religious reasons to raise their hands and be put on a list so that they could discuss the issue with her when they were impaneled. I raised my hand and gave my name but was dismissed before I ever reached the jury box because the lawyers chose 12 jurors before my number was called.
> 
> So I never got to tell the judge that I had not sworn to god when the bailiff told us all to do so. I never got to ask her if that disqualified me as a juror and why would that be so. Certainly I was never offered an alternative to swearing to God or "given the opportunity" to do so I was told to do so.
> 
> ...



Honestly, Ang, I don't think you had to swear to God. You should have asked right then and there. 

I'm also guessing your message boarding antics have you on some kind of crack pot list and you'll never get chosen for jury duty.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

Tech_Esq said:


> Oh gotcha, yeah, AR is good for that.
> 
> That's a good question. I think that Paganism is diverse enough in its practice that there is no one common think that would suffice for all who call themselves Pagans. Some believe in specific Pantheons of Gods and Goddesses (Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Celtic etc.). In those cases, something symbolic of the appropriate God or Goddess would probably be right. In other cases, people don't specifically break it out like that and the deity(ies) is/are more amorphous than that. I put myself in more of the latter category. If I had more religious discipline I would probably pick a Pantheon because I do see the point, but I've never really gone through the effort.
> 
> Back to your point, I'm not sure that there is something you could give me that I would be willing to "swear" on and it would be meaningful as intended by the process.



Thanks for the links. As far as being pagan or atheist and not wishing to swear to God, I would think even some religious people have an objection to God, Allah, whomever, being made part of the judicial process.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Honestly, Ang, I don't think you had to swear to God. You should have asked right then and there.
> 
> I'm also guessing your message boarding antics have you on some kind of crack pot list and you'll never get chosen for jury duty.



Sigh, unlike the crack pots, I followed courtroom procedure and raised my hand when the judge asked me to. Not a good idea to speak out of turn in a court of law.


----------



## Shogun (Jul 31, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Well, they don't really _scare_ me, they just have been crashing my browser lately. I need to update adobe.
> 
> What would a Pagan swear on, if asked?



that, or get more ram and stop opening 15 tabs on your browser..  PDFs are notoriously hoggish on the memory.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Jul 31, 2008)

Anguille said:


> If you had actually read my posts rather than just invent ways to discredit them, you would understand that I never got to ask the judge if a juror must swear to God to serve on jury. I, along with the rest of the jury pool, was told, to stand and repeat and oath which included the words,"swear to God". I stood but remained silent at the swear to God part. The judge next asked for all who had questions about their ability to serve on jury for whatever reason, work or family commitments, health or religious reasons to raise their hands and be put on a list so that they could discuss the issue with her when they were impaneled. I raised my hand and gave my name but was dismissed before I ever reached the jury box because the lawyers chose 12 jurors before my number was called.
> 
> So I never got to tell the judge that I had not sworn to god when the bailiff told us all to do so. I never got to ask her if that disqualified me as a juror and why would that be so. Certainly I was never offered an alternative to swearing to God or "given the opportunity" to do so I was told to do so.
> 
> ...



I disagree with the way that courtroom was run. 

But, and even though my religious affiliations are as I stated, the Courts and Law of the United States and England are inextricably tied to their Judeo-Christian foundation. You have to remember that under English Common Law (which all states in the US with the exception of Louisiana are founded on) there was a distinction between Law and Equity courts. Legal courts were run by the crown and Equity courts were run by the church. This distinction is not completely gone and in some states, like Virginia, there continues to be a real distinction in the way cases are plead at Equity and at Law.

By summarily ripping religion from the foundation of Equity, you remove that firm basis from which Equity decisions were founded calling into question the very chain of _stare decisis_ which creates the current understanding of those cases. 

In the court setting, I think that the few remaining religious artifacts of a by-gone time remind a great many people of the solemnity of the proceedings being held. For those of us where that is not the case so be it, but I hardly think that the very foundations of the legal system need to shaken so some people like me won't be offended by the process.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

Tech_Esq said:


> I disagree with the way that courtroom was run.
> 
> But, and even though my religious affiliations are as I stated, the Courts and Law of the United States and England are inextricably tied to their Judeo-Christian foundation. You have to remember that under English Common Law (which all states in the US with the exception of Louisiana are founded on) there was a distinction between Law and Equity courts. Legal courts were run by the crown and Equity courts were run by the church. This distinction is not completely gone and in some states, like Virginia, there continues to be a real distinction in the way cases are plead at Equity and at Law.
> 
> ...



That's interesting what you have to say about the history of law. I don't agree though, that no longer requiring people to swear to God would in any way take away from the solemnity of the proceedings or shake the foudations of the legal system. In fact it would only solidify the principal of separation of Church and State, not to mention increase the  number of citizens available , granted probably by a very minuscule number, to serve on juries once the religious requirements were removed.

I am not particularly in favor or spending money on things like removing statues of the ten commandments or redesigning our currency again, but putting an end to practices that contradict the Constitution is a good idea IMO, and I'm glad to see that some states and some judges are doing that.


----------



## jillian (Jul 31, 2008)

Tech_Esq said:


> I disagree with the way that courtroom was run.
> 
> But, and even though my religious affiliations are as I stated, the Courts and Law of the United States and England are inextricably tied to their Judeo-Christian foundation. You have to remember that under English Common Law (which all states in the US with the exception of Louisiana are founded on) there was a distinction between Law and Equity courts. Legal courts were run by the crown and Equity courts were run by the church. This distinction is not completely gone and in some states, like Virginia, there continues to be a real distinction in the way cases are plead at Equity and at Law.
> 
> ...



You're kidding, right? The founders were deists who couldn't run fast enough from the church of england.

The Equity Courts in England, PRE-REFORMATION, were indeed a network of about 400 eccliastical courts. But at that time, most government was run by the Chuch. Churches dealt with their own communities.

This bears no rational relationship to courts of equity today. Equity is intended to make right anything that a legal remedy (or money) won't. It encompasses the granting of injunctions, division of property, compelling someone to do something, etc.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with judeo-christian anything.



> Equity is the name given to the set of legal principles, in jurisdictions following the English common law tradition, which supplement strict rules of law where their application would operate harshly, so as to achieve what is sometimes referred to as "natural justice." It is often confusingly contrasted with "law", which in this context refers to "statutory law" (the laws enacted by a legislature, such as the United States Congress), and "common law" (the principles established by judges when they decide cases).
> 
> In modern practice, perhaps the most important distinction between law and equity is the set of remedies each offers. The most common civil remedy a Court of law can award is money damages. Equity, however, enters injunctions or decrees directing someone either to act or to forbear from acting. Often this form of relief is in practical terms more valuable to a litigant. A plaintiff whose neighbor will not return his only milk cow, which wandered onto the neighbor's property, for example, may want that particular cow back and not just its monetary value. However, in general, a litigant cannot obtain equitable relief unless there is "no adequate remedy at law"&#8212;that is, a court will not grant an injunction unless monetary damages are an insufficient remedy for the injury in question. Law courts also enter orders, called "writs" (such as a writ of habeas corpus) but they are less flexible and less easily obtained than an injunction.



Equity (law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

And, for Anguille.... No Courts force you to take an oath to G-d, you "swear OR affirm" to tell the truth.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Jul 31, 2008)

Anguille said:


> That's interesting what you have to say about the history of law. I don't agree though, that no longer requiring people to swear to God would in any way take away from the solemnity of the proceedings or shake the foudations of the legal system. In fact it would only solidify the principal of separation of Church and State, not to mention increase the  number of citizens available , granted probably by a very minuscule number, to serve on juries once the religious requirements were removed.
> 
> I am not particularly in favor or spending money on things like removing statues of the ten commandments or redesigning our currency again, but putting an end to practices that contradict the Constitution is a good idea IMO, and I'm glad to see that some states and some judges are doing that.



We have no disagreements then. Like I said up front, I disagree with the way that court proceeding was run. The difference, in my mind, between "swearing" and "affirming" is _de minimus_ and should be freely used.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Jul 31, 2008)

jillian said:


> You're kidding, right? The founders were deists who couldn't run fast enough from the church of england.
> 
> The Equity Courts in England, PRE-REFORMATION, were indeed a network of about 400 eccliastical courts. But at that time, most government was run by the Chuch. Churches dealt with their own communities.
> 
> ...



Jillian, we don't have a disagreement about the history or the current practice of equity in the court system, it appears. I'm not as sure as you appear to be that if you remove the core principle upon which cases for hundreds of years have been decided, that it is without effect.

You might be right, but we're risking screwing up our courts for what great purpose? For me, the Standard of Review for what ever the change is that's proposed would have to be strict scrutiny. 

And you are correct Jillian, the witnesses swear or affirm. But, strangely for jurors it appears not to be quite as cut and dried. In the juror's handbook I posted earlier, it allowed for swearing only on the Bible in some cases. I found that very odd. I've never heard of it, but knowing some judges, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened.


----------



## Anguille (Jul 31, 2008)

jillian said:


> You're kidding, right? The founders were deists who couldn't run fast enough from the church of england.
> 
> The Equity Courts in England, PRE-REFORMATION, were indeed a network of about 400 eccliastical courts. But at that time, most government was run by the Chuch. Churches dealt with their own communities.
> 
> ...



Nobody, not even a court, could force me to swear to God. Well, maybe if they used waterboarding..,
But my question was about what happens when people refuse to swear to God when called to perform jury duty?  I would have like to known what that judge would have had to say but I was dismissed from jury duty before I had the chance to tell her I had remained silent. Till reading the responses in this thread I was not even aware that affirming is an option in many courtrooms. Perhaps it was in that one as well, it was, however never presented as such. It seems like common sense to me that afirmimg would be all that would be necessary in an juror's oath.


----------



## jillian (Jul 31, 2008)

Tech_Esq said:


> Jillian, we don't have a disagreement about the history or the current practice of equity in the court system, it appears. I'm not as sure as you appear to be that if you remove the core principle upon which cases for hundreds of years have been decided, that it is without effect.
> 
> You might be right, but we're risking screwing up our courts for what great purpose? For me, the Standard of Review for what ever the change is that's proposed would have to be strict scrutiny.
> 
> And you are correct Jillian, the witnesses swear or affirm. But, strangely for jurors it appears not to be quite as cut and dried. In the juror's handbook I posted earlier, it allowed for swearing only on the Bible in some cases. I found that very odd. I've never heard of it, but knowing some judges, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened.



From the NYS Jurors' Handbook:



> The oath is a pledge that the juror will act fairly and impartially in the role as a judge of all questions of fact. This oath obligates the juror to put aside individual emotions or opinions and to use logic and objectivity throughout the trial and the deliberations.



NYS Unified Court System Juror Information

I've never seen a juror have to place a hand on a religious book.  Of course, that might differ depending on where one lives.

And I appreciate your response. Thank you.

I think where we disagree is that I don't believe that religion is the core basis of the system. I think quite the opposite. I believe the values of the enlightenment and philosophy are what underpin our judicial system. Religion, if any, would be a more deist type of pov than any specific Christian concept. I also happen to think that these ideas, like any other philosophical concepts are interesting to discuss.

I also don't think we're risking anything. In my experience, jurors take their jobs very seriously no matter how small or large the case and whether or not they belief in a deity or not.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Jul 31, 2008)

jillian said:


> From the NYS Jurors' Handbook:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks Jillian,

I don't think we disagree when it comes to the oath part. I'm not at all worried about jurors taking the job seriously. My opinion of them is the same as yours. Also, I've never seen anyone required to swear on a Bible, but I've practiced in some interesting courtrooms in front of some interesting southern judges. It would not at all surprise me if one of them made a rule like that.

I clearly understand that our Founders were, by in large, Deists. But, as you know while the Constitution was the foundation of our federal statutory laws, it was not the foundation of the laws in effect in the states at the time. Even today, the law of Virginia is the English common law as it existed in 1765 and modified by statute since. If you really want an odyssey through time, come and practice divorce law here. (Legal separation is not recognized as a concept. You can, under rare circumstances, get a Divorce a Mensa et Thoro and of course you end up with a Divorce a vincula Matrimonii).  

But the point is that there is a substantial part of state law that you can trace directly back to a time when equity was far more ecclesiastical in its reasoning than today. When the courts began hearing both, they didn't just snap their fingers and change the way they heard or reasoned cases. It was a very gradual change. But I don't see any big reason to change anything about it do you?


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Anguille*
> I don't think public school students should be made to pray in class and this incident seemed very similar to me.
> I don't think that people should be made to feel they must swear to God in a courtroom. Public schools and United States courtrooms must not have religious affiliations.



Anguille,

Im pleasantly surprised with your posts. The issue of school prayer clearly shows the inherent flaws of the american model of secularism.

*Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.*

In other words, teachers (representatives of the state) arent allowed to create an embarassing situation by initiating prayers but classmates are.

This is a fact, people. American secularism, as enshrined in the first amendment, does not protect an atheist, muslim, jewish child/teenager from embarrassement provoked by the free exercise of religion.

I have nothing but respect for the framers of the US Constitution. They were men ahead of their time but the american model of secularism is an idea whose time has passed. The first ammendment needs to be modified to reflect the fact that the secular nature of the modern democratic state prevents the free exercise of religion in public schools, courts, etc...


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

And here comes the resident patriots of the Board...

*Don&#8217;t you dare propose changes to the US Constitution!!!

Don&#8217;t you know Madison climbed Mount Sinai and received the US Constitution directly from the hands of the Almighty?*


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

Tech_Esq decided to complicate the issue even more by bringing up the issue of state rights. 

The US was founded as a loose confederation of states and although the federal government has slowly eroded much of that state autonomy the american states still enjoy much more freedom than states and provinces in other countries.

I think regional autonomy is a good thing but *not to the point of compromising the core values of a modern representative republic*. When the US was founded it was a secular country at the federal level and (in many cases) a christian theocracy at the state level. A political monstruosity that defies description.

As far as these basic values are concerned, any functional state must impose conformity on its political subunits and secularism is one of these values. A state with theocratic traits within a secular federation is an aberration.

You cannot spend 10 years in jail for robbing a bank in California and have your hand cut off, shariah style, for the same crime in Texas (a farcical example but Im sure you got the gist)


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

Im gonna try to simplify, editec:

1)  The partition of Palestine was a miserable failure. There will never be a palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza because the right to live in Palestine is *the non-negotiable core of the palestinian national identity*. No people can renounce to the defining factor of its own natinal identity. Forget it.

2)  Palestinians would like to rule a unitary state in Palestine like south african blacks rule their country, by simple majority. Theyd like to exercise unrestricted self determination in their own homeland, I wont argue against facts. But *this is not part of their national identity*. A limited sovereignty and self determination under international oversight *is open for negotiation because it does not compromise their national identity*.

But its imperative that the world community does its part by pressuring Israel to desegregate and, at the same time, offering total protection to the jewish people. And dont fool yourself: under intense international pressure the jewish racial dictatorship wouldnt last long. Intense pressure must be put on the palestinians too, so they come to terms with the fact they will enjoy limited sovereignty in a single state.

*The palestinian people will never be convinced  to renounce to their historical homeland but they can be convinced to share sovereignty over the land with the jewish people.*

If you think this is starry-eyed idealism youre arguing against facts. This is a reality in South Africa now. International pressure and much less international guarantees managed to desegregate the country.

But as I said the biggest obstacle continues to be the lack of political will and the pessimism displayed by so many people. A chinese proverb immediately comes to mind:

*If you think youre gonna fail, you failed before you start.
*


----------



## Ravi (Aug 1, 2008)

Um, Jose? Public school children are already protected from being forced to pray in school. And teachers aren't allowed to initiate prayers.


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

I never said they were forced, Ravi.

I said the kind of secularism conceived by the framers of the US constitution does not protect non-religious citizens or followers of minority religions from the following embarrassing situation: *all/most/some students stand up and begin praying outloud*. Ive been through this so I can assure you its tremendously embarrassing and humiliating.

Don't get me wrong, the american model of secularism created by the framers was a fantastic achievement for their time, the first implementation of the non-confessional state idealised by the Enlightenment. But its time has passed. It's time for America to move on and adopt a full-fledged secularism, 21th century secularism that prohibits any overt, blatant "exercise of religion" that may embarrass non-religious citizens.


----------



## Ravi (Aug 1, 2008)

It's called freedom of speech. Not sure why it embarrasses and humilates you...if they talk about Santa does it also embarrass you?


----------



## editec (Aug 1, 2008)

José;733640 said:
			
		

> And here comes the resident patriots of the Board...
> 
> *Don&#8217;t you dare propose changes to the US Constitution!!!*
> 
> *Don&#8217;t you know Madison climbed Mount Sinai and received the US Constitution directly from the hands of the Almighty?*


 
Agreed.

The deification of the Floundering Fathers by we moderns. 

They forged an incredibile document for their time, given the problems they had to ignore (like slavery), but their time passed, as _they knew it would._

Fortunely for us, they had the foresight to make it possible for future generations to interpret that document in ways that made it possible for this nation to change with changing conditions. They built into that remarkable document the possibility of amending it as needed, too.

It is impossible to write a set of laws (or a social contract, if you will) for all time, folks.

They _knew_ that.

Apparently some of us want to believe that is not the case.

Some of us truly want to believe that one can simply impose one's interpretation as the "strict" interpretation of their exact meaning, and dismiss everyone else's interpretations of that document as irrelevant and an imposition of our misguided values upon their perfect document

Rather reminds me of biblical scholars who insist that they -- and they alone! -- have a handle on the mind of God.

The world belongs to the living, folks.


----------



## Anguille (Aug 1, 2008)

editec said:


> Agreed.
> 
> The deification of the Floundering Fathers by we moderns.



Ha ha!



> Rather reminds me of biblical scholars who insist that they -- and they alone! -- have a handle on the mind of God.



Well put!


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> Agreed.
> 
> The deification of the Floundering Fathers by we moderns.
> ...



Exactly!

They sound like a bunch of fundamentalists bombarding each other with biblical, koranic and talmudic passages like there was no tomorrow!!


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Ravi*
> It's called freedom of speech. Not sure why it embarrasses and humilates you...if they talk about Santa does it also embarrass you?



Because we are primates. We don&#8217;t like to feel singled out. But I don&#8217;t really expect you to understand my subjectivity anymore than I can understand yours. Words aren&#8217;t very well suited to convey emotional states. 

Anyway, understanding each other&#8217;s feelings is immaterial.

I don&#8217;t have to understand the embarrassement felt by a christian student surrounded by devil worshippers performing a satanic ritual before class and he doesn&#8217;t need to understand my embarrassement when I saw my classmates performing a religious ritual I didn&#8217;t believe and had no interest in participating.

All we have to do is create laws that protect us all from these embarassing situations when we are in public property. American secularism does a poor job of preventing these situations to occur. It was a brilliant idea but it has already run its historical course.

*Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof OUTSIDE STATE FACILITIES.*

Let&#8217;s upgrade american secularism to bring America and the rest of the world into the 21th century before it comes to an end.


----------



## Ravi (Aug 1, 2008)

José;734519 said:
			
		

> Because we are primates. We dont like to feel singled out. But I dont really expect you to understand my subjectivity anymore than I can understand yours. Words arent very well suited to convey emotional states.
> 
> Anyway, understanding each others feelings is immaterial.
> 
> ...


No, I strongly disagree. If you can limit one type of free speech, you can limit any of them. There is no reason, no reason at all, that students should be denied civil rights as long as they aren't disrupting class time.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Aug 1, 2008)

José;733640 said:
			
		

> And here comes the resident patriots of the Board...
> 
> *Dont you dare propose changes to the US Constitution!!!
> 
> Dont you know Madison climbed Mount Sinai and received the US Constitution directly from the hands of the Almighty?*



Jose, 

You are clearly a bonehead, but I'm a little bored so I'll play with you tonight. More because I like debating Constitutional issues than because I think your sword is sharp.

I think it is fine to propose Constitutional changes and support them being done just as the founders proposed they be done. By super majority in each house of Congress, signature by the President and ratification by 3/4 of the states. Not by skulking up an undemocratic back alley.

Mount Sinai is not in Virginia, you must have your stories crossed.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Aug 1, 2008)

José;733641 said:
			
		

> Tech_Esq decided to complicate the issue even more by bringing up the issue of state rights.
> 
> The US was founded as a loose confederation of states and although the federal government has slowly eroded much of that state autonomy the american states still enjoy much more freedom than states and provinces in other countries.
> 
> ...



No Way Jose! You don't get to pawn this crap off as historical fact. 

Loose confederation of states? We are talking about the US Constitution right? You don't think we are still living under the Articles of Confederation do you?

The social contract in the US was formed by by-passing the states by constitutional convention. The Constitution was ratified by the people of the states not by the states. If you don't understand the difference you need to get educated.

There is absolutely no reason to have a monolithic government in the US with one law that covers all people. That's fine if you are in some small European country smaller than some states in the US, but there is no guiding principle of representative democracy or republican government that says that everyone must live under one set of laws. Indeed, Federalism is a practical necessity for a country like the US where there are such broad differences between people's attitudes living in different parts of the country. I certainly don't want to live under the laws of Massachusetts, for instance and I bet they don't want to live under Virginia's laws.

"... must Impose conformity"? Seriously Jose, what are you some kind of fascist?

"theocratic traits?" Really? Go ahead and call out names. I'm as irreligious as the next guy, so I wanna know who has a State government with theocratic tendencies chicken little.

I think the differences in how we punish crimes is a serious benefit to the federal system. Each state gets to decide punishment for crimes committed in their midst. And, they get to be mini-labs for what policies work and which don't.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Aug 1, 2008)

editec said:


> Agreed.
> 
> The deification of the Floundering Fathers by we moderns.
> 
> ...



I would suggest you read the Constitution again. You do the "Floundering" fathers an injustice by saying they ignored slavery. There were many compromises made in the Constitution to both get it passed and to build real limits into the continuance of slavery. It's a cheap shot 200 years and a civil war later to second guess what they did.

I agree with your second point.

I agree with your third point.

I think it is better to base a judicial opinion on something rather than nothing. You should read Judge Bork's The Tempting Of America for insight into what it really means to decide cases as an _originalist or strict constuctionist_ I think you'll find it isn't exactly what you think it is. Some people give it really bad press because they have a legislative agenda they are trying to push through the courts and originalists would be an impediment to that. I think it is not legitimate to push a *legislative* agenda in the courts.


----------



## Tech_Esq (Aug 1, 2008)

José;733642 said:
			
		

> Im gonna try to simplify, editec:
> 
> 1)  The partition of Palestine was a miserable failure. There will never be a palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza because the right to live in Palestine is *the non-negotiable core of the palestinian national identity*. No people can renounce to the defining factor of its own natinal identity. Forget it.
> 
> ...



Pie in the sky. You can compare Israel to South Africa until Mt. Everest is a mere hillock, but you will never get the world to isolate Israel like they did SA. Despite the rhetoric (and I'm not entirely unsympathetic to it) that the Palestinians are in an apartheid situation, it just ain't the same. Jews are not Boers and they don't have the same history. And the western world simply will not put the Jews through another period of privation on purpose.


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Tech_Esq*
> Loose confederation of states? We are talking about the US Constitution right? You don't think we are still living under the Articles of Confederation do you?
> 
> The social contract in the US was formed by by-passing the states by constitutional convention. The Constitution was ratified by the people of the states not by the states. If you don't understand the difference you need to get educated.



I think some of the Articles of Confederation (&#8220;each state is free, independent, sovereign etc..etc...) found their way into the Constitution (&#8220;the powers... are reserved to the states). The early US fits the definition of a loose Confederation quite well. You admited it yourself in a previous post:

*I clearly understand that our Founders were, by in large, Deists. But, as you know while the Constitution was the foundation of our federal statutory laws, it was not the foundation of the laws in effect in the states at the time.

But the point is that there is a substantial part of state law that you can trace directly back to a time when equity was far more ecclesiastical in its reasoning than today.
*
Deist/Secular foundation at the federal level + ecclesiastical foundation at the state level = *loose confederation*.

Political union in which member states enjoy great autonomy (establish official religions, etc...) and can even join and leave it at will (10th ammendment according to the South) = *loose confederation*.


----------



## José (Aug 1, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Tech_Esp*
> "theocratic traits?" Really? Go ahead and call out names. I'm as irreligious as the next guy, so I wanna know who has a State government with theocratic tendencies chicken little.



Massachussets, 1830. Not only theocratic tendencies but a full-blown state religion.

But Im glad to see you agree with my previous statements:

*I think regional autonomy is a good thing but not to the point of compromising the core values of a modern representative republic.

A state with theocratic traits within a secular federation is a political monstruosity that defies description.*

PS: There are dozens of theocratic leftovers and additions as Anguille noted created by federal and state governments/legilative branch. The use of religious books in courts just to remain within the confines of this debate.


----------



## José (Aug 2, 2008)

In 1776, the american national identity was not crystalised yet. People, the founders included, took great pride in their respective states and considered themselves Virginians, etc... first. In hindsight, the creation of a descentralised confederation was a historical mistake the framers couldnt have escaped from.

But the nascent american national identity, *that wouldnt accept the partition of America just like palestinians cant accept the partition of their homeland*, eventually collided with the confederated political union created by the framers and the result was a fratricide war that claimed the lives of 600.000 (?) americans.

The so-called *War Between the States* is a living proof that a nation state created from autonomous units with separated local identities and organised as a confederate state is often a recipe for civil war.

As I said, regional autonomy is a good thing but in early America it was too much of a good thing.


----------



## José (Aug 2, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Tech_Esq*
> Jose,
> 
> You are clearly a bonehead, but I'm a little bored so I'll play with you tonight. More because I like debating Constitutional issues than because I think your sword is sharp.
> ...



I didn't have you in mind when I wrote "And here comes the resident patriots...", Tech. Lighten up a bit.


----------



## José (Aug 2, 2008)

> Originally posted by *Tech_Esq*
> Pie in the sky. You can compare Israel to South Africa until Mt. Everest is a mere hillock, but you will never get the world to isolate Israel like they did SA. Despite the rhetoric (and I'm not entirely unsympathetic to it) that the Palestinians are in an apartheid situation, it just ain't the same. Jews are not Boers and they don't have the same history. And the western world simply will not put the Jews through another period of privation on purpose.



OK.

But what happens when palestinians can't get over the loss of their homeland, Israel doesn't accept their right to live in Western Palestine and the West refuses to pressure both sides to share the land?

You have an endless war, you have scores of arab young men willing to attack the West, you have the US retaliating and arab/muslim countries building nuclear deterrences and eventually you have a worldwide nuclear conflagration.


----------



## editec (Aug 2, 2008)

Tech_Esq said:


> I would suggest you read the Constitution again. You do the "Floundering" fathers an injustice by saying they ignored slavery. There were many compromises made in the Constitution to both get it passed and to build real limits into the continuance of slavery. It's a cheap shot 200 years and a civil war later to second guess what they did.


 
Probably somewhat inflammatory, I'll admit. My flippent way of blowing off those whoimagine the FF shat marble and that the Consitution was the best thing written since the time of Moses, you know? 

But they_ knew_ that they were passing off the problem to the following generations. EvenEdmund Randolf  knew that slavery was going to be a problem down the line, but he ALSO knew that the Constitution (which he refused at first to sign onto at the convention) was at best a compromise to slavery that would blow up eventually

Their compromises were putting off the problem and they all KNEW it.



> I think it is better to base a judicial opinion on something rather than nothing. You should read Judge Bork's The Tempting Of America for insight into what it really means to decide cases as an _originalist or strict constuctionist_ I think you'll find it isn't exactly what you think it is. Some people give it really bad press because they have a legislative agenda they are trying to push through the courts and originalists would be an impediment to that. I think it is not legitimate to push a *legislative* agenda in the courts.


 
I think I'd do better if you encapsulated the jist of the difference between _originalist or strict constuctionist_ for me, TE.

I have little doubt I don't get it, but I have no doubt that there's so many books and so little time that I won't be reading Bork's book.

I have confidence you can address Borks themes for we laymen.

Educate me, please, if you have time.

I'm sure others here would appreciate your thoughts and Borks, too.

Jose,

I don't think you're a starry-eyed idealist. Of course, I know that the lands ceded to the PA are not a viable land and something MUST be done about that.

I just can't see how we get from where we are NOW, to a single state solution.

I can't imagine either the Israelis OR the Palestinians buying into that internationalization of that land NOW.


----------



## Shogun (Aug 2, 2008)

*
I just can't see how we get from where we are NOW, to a single state solution.*

neither could all those white folk for the first 75% of our nations history.  I can tell you how we WONT see an isreal where democrcy and equality mean more than racism however....  That is, if you dont mind favoring one side while whipping out the scarlet A branding iron.


----------



## Charles_Main (Aug 2, 2008)

Why do you even keep up the charade of Calling it Israel Shog? I mean really if you got your single state solution it would not be Israel anymore, and the Jews would be driven out and the Palestinians would own it all. 

So much for wanting equality among the races. A single state solution is just a nice way of saying you want Israel destroyed. THAT will be the outcome. Have you ever even been to Israel or the territories? I have, and I also heard many stories about it from my mother. I am confident I am right about what would happen if a single state solution was ever implemented. neither side wants to share with the other. Despite what you believe.

That is why I favor a 2 state solution along the 67 Borders. As does the leaders of both sides.


----------



## editec (Aug 2, 2008)

Shogun said:


> *I just can't see how we get from where we are NOW, to a single state solution.*
> 
> neither could all those white folk for the first 75% of our nations history. I can tell you how we WONT see an isreal where democrcy and equality mean more than racism however.... That is, if you dont mind favoring one side while whipping out the scarlet A branding iron.


 
_Ouch!_

Well...we eventually did figure it out, thanks to the hot heads who attacked US bases and armories...and all it took was about 600,000 lives to solve that.

If you can get the majority of Palestinians and Israeli to request international troops, and the complete abandonment of both their governments, I'll sign up for that solution.

If you cannot, I think that would be even more disasterous for all concerned than the mess it is now.


----------



## José (Aug 3, 2008)

Editec, an international intervention that ends up increasing the violence will undoubtedly lead to *MORE* anti-americanism in the Middle East, *MORE* american invasions, etc... etc... . This is self evident even though I dont share your pessimism.

Anyway let me make a comparison to show you how I feel:

During the thirties many voices around the world tried to alert the world community about what was going on in Germany:

*That guy is not arming Germany to the teeth to improve its military parades!! The world must intervene while it still can!!*

But the Chamberlains of the world had the last word.

I feel as frustrated as those guys in the thirties... 

Regardless of how many arab/muslim countries the US decides to invade and effectuate regime change, the palestinian people will continue to fight and die for their homeland. I have a feeling that this open wound in Palestine will still plunge the world into a much more serious international crisis than the one were going through now but people like me are solemnly ignored by the world community.

So all I can do is lead my own life and hope for the best.


----------



## José (Aug 3, 2008)

> Originally posted by *editec*
> Ouch!
> 
> Well...we eventually did figure it out, thanks to the hot heads who attacked US bases and armories...and all it took was about 600,000 lives to solve that.
> ...



The south african government never willingly agreed to desegregate South Africa, editec. Mandela would still be in jail if the West decided to wait for that inspiring moment.

Pretoria was "politely" strongarmed into submission and finally accepted majority rule under enormous pressure that turned South Africa into an international pariah. Id love to see Palestines desegregation following a different, less confrontational course but your assertion that in order to intervene succesfully the world must wait for the ethnocratic state to come to its senses, see the wrong of its way and agree to desegregate is simply not true.

Ironically, the whole purpose of an international protectorate would be *THE PROTECTION OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE*, who would become a minority group in Western Palestine. Its a reasonable answer to the justified fears and the jewish paranoia over security. If the jewish people deem the presence of international troops unnecesary the world community would be more than happy to simply follow the whole democratisation process at a distance.

Besides, the jewish government and the Palestinian Authority would not disapear into thin air. Their members, if elected, would integrate the new political entity, composed by jews and arabs, that would run Palestine under international supersivion.

And trust me, editec, it wont take a lot of convincing to make palestinians accept the dismantlement of the PA. Even though the palestinian people would have to agree with shared sovereignty under a multinational protectorate, they would enjoy *MUCH MORE* sovereignty than they do now under israeli occupation and a government who cant even collect the garbage without israeli authorisation..

So the palestinian people can be convinced to abandon/dismantle the Palestinian Authority. The only thing they will never abandon is their right to live in their homeland.


----------



## editec (Aug 3, 2008)

José;735147 said:
			
		

> Editec, an international intervention that ends up increasing the violence will undoubtedly lead to *MORE* anti-americanism in the Middle East, *MORE* american invasions, etc... etc... . This is self evident even though I dont share your pessimism.


 
Does that mean you think imposing a single state solution by force of arms upon Isreal and the Palestinians _would work?  _

Anyway let me make a comparison to show you how I feel:



> During the thirties many voices around the world tried to alert the world community about what was going on in Germany:
> 
> *That guy is not arming Germany to the teeth to improve its military parades!! The world must intervene while it still can!!*
> 
> ...


 
Okay.



> Regardless of how many arab/muslim countries the US decides to invade and effectuate regime change, the palestinian people will continue to fight and die for their homeland. I have a feeling that this open wound in Palestine will still plunge the world into a much more serious international crisis than the one were going through now but people like me are solemnly ignored by the world community.


 
Probably right, and of course people like you and I are ignored. 



> So all I can do is lead my own life and hope for the best.


 
Yup.


----------



## Rhys (Aug 3, 2008)

editec said:


> Does that mean you think imposing a single state solution by force of arms upon Isreal and the Palestinians _would work?  _



Has anyone suggested a solution imposed by arms on this terrorist nuclear state?   It can be 'imposed' only by international boycott of racist 'Israel', as it was in South Africa, surely:  when such things begin to bite the 'we'll destroy the world from our bunker' boys soon start reasoning like normal people and begin talking seriously.   Why, for instance, is 'Israel' allowed to count itself as part of Europe for sporting and other such purposes?   Why are racist academics allowed to attend international conferences?   Because of AIPAC's grip on US politicos, that's why.   Why do American voters allow themselves to be controlled like this?   A simple campaign of questioning racism in the Colony could stop all the killing.   Are they anti-semites, or what?


----------



## Shogun (Aug 3, 2008)

editec said:


> _Ouch!_
> 
> Well...we eventually did figure it out, thanks to the hot heads who attacked US bases and armories...and all it took was about 600,000 lives to solve that.
> 
> ...



im not in the mood to convince anyone and be called an antisemite for the effort.  We should cut the umbilical cord and not partake of the bullshit until israel and pals wants to play ball and take advice.  If not, we are no better than the guy who gives the liquer store robber their gun.


----------



## editec (Aug 3, 2008)

Shogun said:


> im not in the mood to convince anyone and be called an antisemite for the effort. We should cut the umbilical cord and not partake of the bullshit until israel and pals wants to play ball and take advice. If not, we are no better than the guy who gives the liquer store robber their gun.


 
Understood.

Except we both know that's not going to happen. America is in bed with Isreal, has been from 1948 and will be until peace is found there, I expect.

I really do not know what it will take to bring the Israeli and Palistinians, together.

It looked peace might break out  after Camp David summit, but the the hotheads start lobbing rockets, and shooting peacemakers, the IDF invaded Lebanon, and well..you all know the rest of the story.


----------



## Shogun (Aug 3, 2008)

well, you know, there was a time when the US wasn't going to interfere with ww2 despite germany eating euro like a cancer.  And look what became of THAT move.  And it's nothing shocking that there is a double standard verified blank check for israel.  Anyone pointing that out gets y pluribum unum Scarlet A to put onto their jooo hating letter jacket.

peace is found there?  in this direction it will only be the same 'peace" that we found after all but exterminating that pesky native thorn up until the 1900s.  I'm not fond of the prospect.

And, again, cutting the cord on nations that invalidate democracy and retain an ethnic stanglehold would make israel reconsider it's options.  Until we cut the cord isreal knows it doesnt have to do shit beyond purposfully misinterpreting iranian presidents and claiming a monopoly on victimhood.

indeed, it looked promising until YAbin was assasinated too.  Funny how we never mention THAT...  Any guess on how influential the ethnicity of his killer is to bringing THAT up?  But, without a second thought no one hesitates to talk shit on lebennon.  Funny how that works, eh?

*Syria breaks silence on Rabin murder*

Syria, officially silent immediately after the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, has now condemned the killing. Reporters traveling with President Clinton and the U.S. delegation to Rabin's funeral Monday were briefed on a telephone call placed by U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher to Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad after Saturday's murder. Assad told Christopher that Rabin's assassination was "a tragic event," according to a senior Clinton administration official.

Leaders from two other Arab neighbors of Israel, King Hussein of Jordan and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, are attending the funeral.

Syria and Lebanon are the only immediate neighbors of Israel which have not reached a peace agreement with the Jewish state. Negotiations are stalled over the issue of the Golan Heights, which Israel seized from Syria in the 1967 Mideast war. Christopher visited Damascus a week ago as part of an effort to revive the Israeli-Syrian peace talks. Before the Rabin assassination, U.S. officials said they hoped to see the talks resumed at some point.
CNN - Syria breaks silence on Rabin - Nov. 6, 1995


----------



## Shogun (Aug 3, 2008)

HERE is how israel treats a jewish assassin of Rabin.


Up until October 20, 2006 the Shabak security service had opposed unsupervised visits. [7] *Four days later, Amir was allowed a 10-hour-long conjugal visit with Larisa. Five months later it was reported that Larisa was pregnant, [8] and on October 28, 2007 she gave birth to a son: Yinon Eliya Shalom (Hebrew: &#1497;&#1504;&#1493;&#1503; &#1488;&#1500;&#1497;&#1492; &#1513;&#1500;&#1493;&#1501;&#8206. The brit milah took place in Rimonim prison on November 4, 2007 after Amir's appeal to the district court to be present at his son's circumcision was accepted.[9]

In 2007 Amir family and the "Committee for Democracy" campaigned to release Yigal and Hagai Amir. Their campaign included stickers, posters and a short film.*

Yigal Amir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


but hey.. lets talk about lebennon.


----------



## editec (Aug 3, 2008)

Shogun said:


> HERE is how israel treats a jewish assassin of Rabin.
> 
> 
> Up until October 20, 2006 the Shabak security service had opposed unsupervised visits. [7] *Four days later, Amir was allowed a 10-hour-long conjugal visit with Larisa. Five months later it was reported that Larisa was pregnant, [8] and on October 28, 2007 she gave birth to a son: Yinon Eliya Shalom (Hebrew: &#1497;&#1504;&#1493;&#1503; &#1488;&#1500;&#1497;&#1492; &#1513;&#1500;&#1493;&#1501;&#8206. The brit milah took place in Rimonim prison on November 4, 2007 after Amir's appeal to the district court to be present at his son's circumcision was accepted.[9]*
> ...


 
Well...what do you expect?

It was an inside job.

As was the assassination of Anwar Sadat.

Like I said, the resident warmongers on both sides killed their peacemakers.


----------



## José (Aug 4, 2008)

This will be my last contribution to this epic thread, people.


----------



## José (Aug 4, 2008)

Epsilon Delta

Cheer up cause youre not alone, bro. Check this out:



> Originally posted by *editec*
> It looked peace might break out after Camp David summit, but the the hotheads start lobbing rockets, and shooting peacemakers, the IDF invaded Lebanon, and well..you all know the rest of the story.





> Originally posted by *editec*
> Like I said, the resident warmongers on both sides killed their peacemakers.



tsk, tsk, tsk...

Once again, the total lack of knowledge on the palestinian people shows its ugly face to the members of the United States Message Board. With so many people talking out of their asses about the palestinian people I wonder how they find enough time to perform the bodily functions that part of their anatomy is supposed to.

Id like to end my participation in this thread with an dumbed down explanation on why the two state solution will never work.


----------



## José (Aug 4, 2008)

Epsilon Delta quoted a palestinian spokesman named Ismail Abu Shanab: 



> Originally posted by *Epsilon Delta*
> Hamas' spokesman Ismail Abu Shanab said on the same day that his organisation would accept the initiative:
> 
> *"That would be satisfactory for all Palestinian military groups to stop and build our state, to be busy in our own affairs, and have good neighborhood with Israelis."*



What Delta doesn&#8217;t know is that when Ismail gets home after giving that interview in *English*, he gather his children around him, points to a map of Palestine without Israel on it and says in *Arabic*:

&#8220;This is your homeland. This is the land your grandparents and great-grandparents lived in and to which you&#8217;re gonna return some day.&#8221;

*The two state solution will ultimately fail as a final resolution for the Israeli/Palestinian conflict because when you ask a palestinian child to imagine their historical homeland in their minds, they visualise the entire region of Palestine not just the West Bank and Gaza.*

From 80 year old palestinians who are refugees themselves to the youngest generation the entire palestinian society rejects the idea of the West Bank and Gaza as being their historical homeland no matter how many times palestinian spokesmen say otherwise in English speaking to western audiences.

Camp David collapsed before a single fire were shot by &#8220;hotheads&#8221; and so will any peace plan that demmands the palestinian people to renounce to their homeland.

Camp David collapsed because no palestinian leader, not even Arafat, is entrusted, by the palestinian people, with enough authority to renounce their right to live in their homeland.

This doesn't mean there isn't a place for the two state solution. *It only means that this solution must be presented as an intermediary step before a single state solution is reached as a final solution.* As long as the two state solution continues to be presented to the palestinian people as a final status agreement it will continue to generate violence in Palestine.

But it&#8217;s alright. An expert on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict like me trying to explain the nooks and crannies of this issue to western laymen is like a particle physicist trying to explain the inner structure of the atom to a tribe of pigmees living deep in the jungles of Congo.

Or Rhys trying to get across any message to us in Welsh.

An exercise in frustration and, ultimately, in futility.


----------



## José (Aug 4, 2008)

As my participation in this thread comes to an end I&#8217;d like to congratulate my brothers in arms who helped me crush all the lies and excuses brought forth by the Zionists.

*Shogun*, my trustful partner in so many historic, fierce battles against endless hordes of racist jews and super patriotic american clowns who roam this Message Board with total impunity.

*Rhys*, this Owain Glyndwr of the 21th century, this fearless celtic warrior who clearly understands the similarities between Zionism and the cultural imperialism exercised by England in Wales for so long.

*Anguille*, who is baffled by the perverted, sordid nature of a state that grants automatic citizenship to russian jews who never left Europe and keeps palestinians born in Jerusalem herded into refugee camps.

*Reality*, and his discreet but &#8220;real&#8221; contribution.

And last but not least, *editec* and *Epsilon Delta*... why not? 

Both of them are fair minded individuals who have stated they&#8217;d like to see a Promising Land in Palestine instead of the racist Promised Land of Zionism. 

Congratulations on a job well done!!

Zionism took a beatdown of astronomical proportions... a beatdown to remember!!

I&#8217;m proud of you all, guys.

Until we meet again,

Goodbye : )


----------



## Shogun (Aug 4, 2008)

editec said:


> Well...what do you expect?
> 
> It was an inside job.
> 
> ...



well.. no, you didn't SAY both.. you implied Lebennon.  It seems to be easier to point at muslims as natural born terrorists despite the fact of Rabin's assasination.

what do I expect?  I expect people to be treated equally despite some *chosen* PR pipe dream.


----------



## Care4all (Aug 12, 2008)

Jose, why do you think the Arabs have kept the palestinians in refuge camps in their own countries and not assimilated them in to their own societies, all of these years?

do you have anything to say on that...?  Or what is your reasoning on why they have continued to do this, keep them hearded up in a camp?  Do they not want palestinians mingled in their own societies?

This, I have never understood


----------



## editec (Aug 13, 2008)

Care4all said:


> Jose, why do you think the Arabs have kept the palestinians in refuge camps in their own countries and not assimilated them in to their own societies, all of these years?


 
Because if they did, the status quo in their nations would change radically, I expect.  



> This, I have never understood


 
Looks what happened to the delicate balance of power in Lebanon when the Palestinians got there.

I think that pretty much explains it. 

Just because they're Arabs doesn't mean they're all the same culture.

Germans and French are essentially the same race, but they don't exactly love one another, either.


----------



## Charles_Main (Aug 20, 2008)

editec said:


> Because if they did, the status quo in their nations would change radically, I expect.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





And yet you want Israel to absorb them all. Nice double standard.


----------



## Shogun (Aug 21, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> And yet you want Israel to absorb them all. Nice double standard.



...yes.. the palis CAME FROM THE LAND THAT WE NOW CALL ISRAEL rather than lebennon.


nice logical bait and switch you got there..  typical.


----------



## Anguille (Aug 21, 2008)

Shogun said:


> ...yes.. the palis CAME FROM THE LAND THAT WE NOW CALL ISRAEL rather than lebennon.
> 
> 
> nice logical bait and switch you got there..  typical.



Actually, "we" all came from Africa, if you think that rights to citizenship can be inherited.


----------



## Shogun (Aug 21, 2008)

Do you REALLY want to mention (south) AFRICA, yo?


----------



## editec (Aug 21, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> And yet you want Israel to absorb them all. Nice double standard.


 
I do?


----------



## editec (Aug 21, 2008)

Shogun said:


> well.. no, you didn't SAY both.. you implied Lebennon.


 
I did? You'd best stick to reading what I write and give up trying to put words in my mouth, sport.



> It seems to be easier to point at muslims as natural born terrorists despite the fact of Rabin's assasination.


 
Yeah, like the above, for example.



> what do I expect? I expect people to be treated equally despite some *chosen* PR pipe dream.


 
Perhaps you ought to first learn to read and stop trying to smear people by strawmanning them, sport.


----------



## Shogun (Aug 21, 2008)

editec said:


> I did? You'd best stick to reading what I write and give up trying to put words in my mouth, sport.
> 
> Yeah, like the above, for example.
> 
> Perhaps you ought to first learn to read and stop trying to smear people by strawmanning them, sport.





dude.. you can get defensive all you want but, as i've shown, im quick to quote a motherfucker.  If you need this same courtesy then let me know.


----------



## Anguille (Aug 21, 2008)

editec said:


> I did? You'd best stick to reading what I write and give up trying to put words in my mouth, sport.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Shogun is losing an argument in another thread so he is trying to make a big noise over here in hopes to detract attention from his failures elsewhere.


----------



## Ravi (Aug 21, 2008)

Charles_Main said:


> And yet you want Israel to absorb them all. Nice double standard.


I think you are confusing him with someone else.


----------



## Anguille (Aug 21, 2008)

Shogun said:


> Do you REALLY want to mention (south) AFRICA, yo?



Why not?  Just as you attribute certain opinions to editec, you have forgotten that I favor a united Israel.


----------



## Shogun (Aug 21, 2008)

Anguille said:


> Why not?  Just as you attribute certain opinions to editec, you have forgotten that I favor a united Israel.



why not?  uh, because it's a spot on example of how we don't let white people move in and carve out a nation to the exclusion of the indigenous populations?


and all Edetic has to do is ask to be quoted and I'll either whip out what i responded to your quote the EDIT date.  You see, im just one of those evidence sorta guys.


----------



## Anguille (Aug 21, 2008)

Shogun said:


> why not?  uh, because it's a spot on example of how we don't let white people move in and carve out a nation to the exclusion of the indigenous populations?



I get you now. I thought you were going to use the tactic of saying that SA is evidence that apartheid can be overcome without one segment of the population being massacred or deported.


----------



## Shogun (Aug 21, 2008)

Anguille said:


> I get you now. I thought you were going to use the tactic of saying that SA is evidence that apartheid can be overcome without one segment of the population being massacred or deported.




how is SA evidence of anything even remotely close to that?  Nelson Mandellah was a terrorist, you know.


----------



## editec (Aug 21, 2008)

Shogun said:


> dude.. you can get defensive all you want but, as i've shown, im quick to quote a motherfucker. If you need this same courtesy then let me know.


 

No what you're quick about doing is pretending that people say one thing when they clearly have not, sport.

Maybe that strawman bull passes in the circles of nitwits you run with, but I'll be god damned if I'm going to let that crap pass on me.

Do not presume to tell people on this board what I think.

I speak for myself and you do not have the depth of understanding about this issue to put words in my mouth.

Is that _real _clear, now?

I realize yopu've got a bee in bonnet about Israel, but you can no more articulate my positions on that complex issue than my dog can build a fucking cathedral.


----------



## Shogun (Aug 21, 2008)

CLEARLY?


I told you, dude.. I QUICK to quote a motherfucker.




editec said:


> Understood.
> 
> Except we both know that's not going to happen. America is in bed with Isreal, has been from 1948 and will be until peace is found there, I expect.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anguille (Aug 21, 2008)

editec said:


> No what you're quick about doing is pretending that people say one thing when they clearly have not, sport.
> 
> Maybe that strawman bull passes in the circles of nitwits you run with, but I'll be god damned if I'm going to let that crap pass on me.
> 
> ...



Spankings don't work with Shogun.


----------

