HELP - Israel vs Palestinians - Educate me

[Hollie]

Sure it does. Responding to actions of Islamic terrorists is in everyone's interest.

You're a perfect example of how mentally fucked up Israeli kiss-asses are in the head.

You think what happens in some other country, makes it okay for Israel to do what it's doing to the Palestinian's in Gaza?

You're a lunatic!

Israel is responding to deadly attacks from Islamic terrorists.

How is it that you are so clueless?

 

[Billo_Really]

Un-ending rocket attacks from the Islamic terrorist in Gaza justifies a firm and unequivocal reaction.

The rockets are in response to the un-ending missile attacks and occupation of Palestinian land. And since Israel is the aggressor, no, their actions are not justified and they are certainly not defensive, either.

Otherwise, since when did moslem become a "race"?

Shove that semantical bullshit up your ass! You know exactly what I meant.

 

[Billo_Really]

Israel is responding to deadly attacks from Islamic terrorists.

How is it that you are so clueless?

Deadly attacks my ass!

They've only killed 26 people in 13 years.

How is it you're so fucking clueless?

 

[Hollie]

Israel is responding to deadly attacks from Islamic terrorists.

How is it that you are so clueless?

Deadly attacks my ass!

They've only killed 26 people in 13 years.

How is it you're so fucking clueless?

Only 26 people?

How does that compare to the number of people allowed to be killed by islamo-fascists?

You really are this clueless.

 

[Hollie]

Un-ending rocket attacks from the Islamic terrorist in Gaza justifies a firm and unequivocal reaction.

The rockets are in response to the un-ending missile attacks and occupation of Palestinian land. And since Israel is the aggressor, no, their actions are not justified and they are certainly not defensive, either.

Otherwise, since when did moslem become a "race"?

Shove that semantical bullshit up your ass! You know exactly what I meant.

How is it that I'm supposed to understand what you mean when you have such difficulty understanding terms and definitions?

So, once again, is moslem really a "race"?

 

[Kondor3]

Israel is responding to deadly attacks from Islamic terrorists. How is it that you are so clueless?

Deadly attacks my ass! They've only killed 26 people in 13 years. How is it you're so fucking clueless?

26, in 13 years?

2 per year, on the average?

It's what happens when you get both your design-engineers and your guidance systems from a box of Cracker Jack.

But it's enough to take an occasional Israeli life.

And that's enough of an excuse to stomp-out the brains of Hamas every once in a while.

Not the brightest crayons in the box, these Hamas idjits

 

[Billo_Really]

How is it that I'm supposed to understand what you mean when you have such difficulty understanding terms and definitions?

So, once again, is moslem really a "race"?

You're a troll!

Stop trying to project your bullshit problems on to me.

 

[Billo_Really]

Only 26 people?

How does that compare to the number of people allowed to be killed by islamo-fascists?

You really are this clueless.

It's irrelevant to this discussion, that's how it compares.

 

[Hollie]

How is it that I'm supposed to understand what you mean when you have such difficulty understanding terms and definitions?

So, once again, is moslem really a "race"?

You're a troll!

Stop trying to project your bullshit problems on to me.

You're embarrassed that you really are this clueless, right?

 

[TemplarKormac]

How is it that I'm supposed to understand what you mean when you have such difficulty understanding terms and definitions?

So, once again, is moslem really a "race"?

You're a troll!

Stop trying to project your bullshit problems on to me.

LOL.

Nice dodge. Answer the question.

 

[RoccoR]

Billo_Really, et al,

The concept is both a bit naive and a bit childish.

How would you feel; poster.

(COMMENT)

The US did not always belong to the descendants of immigrants. Just as the Middle East and Persian Gulf did not always belong to the current inhabitants. It is part of history and the development of the species.

The territory of the Middle East has undergone transformation many times, and it will continue to transform itself. Whether we speak of The Sumerian Empire, The Egyptians, The Babylonian, or The Hittite Empires --- whether we remember The Median, Chaldean and Lydian Empires --- whether we chronicle The Persian Empire or the visitation of Alexander's Hellenistic Empire --- OR, we consider the impact of theThe Roman and Parthian Empires - or - that of The Ottoman Empire, the fact is --- there is change.

The Arab Palestinian has to accommodate, assimilate, and adapt, or fall by the wayside like so many other nameless cultures in the past. The object is to save both culture; that of the Jewish People and that of the Palestinian People (whoever they really are) --- if, in fact they want to be saved.

Remember, the composite character of the Palestinians, in this time frame, is that of a people that wants to destroy the most advanced and stable nation in the region. No countries or people that border Israel is developmentally comparable with Israel. And given the propensity for violence and self destruction, none are likely to socially, economically, politically or industrially match the prosperity Israel enjoys for quite some time. Rather than be a despotic culture of socially immature people, the Palestinian should be attempting to emulate its one successful neighbor.

Realistically, who would you rather be? An Israeli or a Palestinian!

My suggestion is to get with the program and encourage the Palestinians to make something of themselves, and what is left of their nation. The need to focus their attention on development and not run around half-cocked cut-throats, terrorist, and Jihadists with no plan or prospects for the future of their nation or their people.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

Only 26 people?

How does that compare to the number of people allowed to be killed by islamo-fascists?

You really are this clueless.

It's irrelevant to this discussion, that's how it compares.

It's not irrelevant at all. My comment speaks directly to the idiocy of your claims.

 

[Hossfly]

Looks alright. We would probably get halvah more oftener than Christmas time.

 

[Mojo2]

I found some good info today that I was looking for. In another thread, I posted this question...

I have heard the following occurred, but I don't have any documentation to support. Can anyone help me document if this is correct?

I heard that during the 1967 Six Day War, Egypt told the Palestinians and the world that they were going to attack Israel and told the Palestinians to leave Jerusalem and Israel so Egypt could attack Jerusalem without injuring the Palestinians. The Palestinians evacuated the area in support of Egypt so they could then go back into Jerusalem and the Israeli state and take the land. After Egypt and Jordan etc lost the 6 day war, the Palestinians wanted to return to take control of the land / homes that they evacuated.

Is this correct?

I found a book that has some good quotes regarding the Palestinians evacuating their land. I was incorrect on the timeline but the principle is the same.

The Arabs are the only declared refugees who became refugees not by the action of their enemies or because of well-grounded fear of their enemies, but by the initiative of their own leaders. For nearly a generation, those leaders have willfully kept as many people as they possibly could in degenerating squalor, preventing their rehabilitation, and holding out to all of them the hope of return and of “vengeance” on the Jews of Israel, to whom they have transferred the blame for their plight....The Arab refugees were not driven from Palestine by anyone. The vast majority left, whether of their own free will or at the orders or exhortations of their leaders, always with the same reassurance that their departure would help in the war against Israel. Attacks by Palestinian Arabs on the Jews had begun two days after the United Nations adopted its decision of November 29, 1947, to divide western Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state. The seven neighboring Arab states Syria, Lebanon, Transjordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Egypt then prepared to invade the country as soon as the birth of the infant State of Israel was announced.

The refugees were confident that their absence would not last long, and that they would return within a week or two. Their leaders had promised them that the Arab armies would crush the ‘Zionist gangs’ very quickly and that there was no need for panic or fear of a long exile.” [Sada at Tanub, August 16, 1948]

“This wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs, encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic Arab press and the irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab States and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and retake possession of their country.”

Kenneth Bilby, one of the Americans who covered Palestine for several weeks during the war of 1948, wrote soon afterwards on his experience and observations:

“The Arab exodus, initially at least, was encouraged by many Arab leaders, such as Haj Amin el Husseini, the exiled pro-Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem, and by the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine. They viewed the first wave of Arab setbacks as merely transitory. Let the Palestine Arabs flee into neighboring countries. It would serve to arouse the other Arab peoples to greater effort, and when the Arab invasion struck, the Palestinians could return to their homes and be compensated with the property of Jews driven into the sea.” [New Star in the Near East (New York, 1950), pp. 30-31]​

These excerpts are from Shmuel Katz, “Battleground: Fact & Fantasy in Palestine.”

I can't post the link since I am a newbie.

Here is the link to the book at the Amazon site.


[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Battleground-Fantasy-Palestine-Samuel-Katz/dp/0929093135[/ame]


And here are a few comments I copied from a different link than the one I just furnished.

Congressman Jack Kemp: "Battleground is one of the best written and most informative histories of the Arab-Israeli conflict... I advise everyone to read it".

Writer Moshe Shamir: "Reaches the roots of the problem, the long memory to the past and the long vision to the future it brilliantly destroys one after one the Arab propaganda lies. The Chapters are full of inspiration about the connection between the People of Israel and the Land of Israel".

Former Prime Minister Menachem Begin: "To most people Battleground surely comes as an eye-opener. I know that even the most knowledgeable people have derived from this book new perceptions, not to mention knowledge, on Jewish history, on the history of Palestine, and on the Arabs"

Former US Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane J. Kirkpatrick: "Reading Battleground is an eye-opener. It is well written, informative, fast-paced and debunks some carefully cultivated myths concerning Israel and the Middle East".

Battleground: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And here are two user reviews of this book.

47 of 51 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent, October 14, 2003

By Alyssa A. Lappen (Earth) - See all my reviews

(TOP 1000 REVIEWER) (VINE VOICE)

This review is from: Battleground: Fact & Fantasy in Palestine (Paperback)

Like the work of Arieh Avneri, Howard Sachar, Connor Cruise O'Brien, Efraim Karsh and Martin Kramer, Battleground is a magnificent piece of reporting on Middle East history, whose most salient facts revisionists have unfortunately papered over during the 29 years since it was first published.

This book recounts the beginnings of a new 55-year Arab jihad war against the Jewish state. Katz elucidates critical parts of the historical puzzle, including this centerpiece: In 1919, less than two years after the Balfour Declaration, Emir Faisal of Syria and Iraq--who along with his father the Sharif Hussein of Mecca were then the only recognized Arab leaders in the world--declared the plan for a Jewish national homeland in all of Palestine as "moderate and proper." (Of course, it was and remains merely an extension of the jihad initiated when the Jewish people rejected Mohammed's claim to be a prophet.)

The book shows that by international vote of the League of Nations at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, the world community adopted a plan to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine--which included all of current day Israel and Transjordan.

One may here read that history, and the treaties between Chaim Weizmann and the Emir Faisal of Iraq, as well as letters supporting this plan by both he and his father, Sharif of Mecca.

"everyone knows, Palestine does not exist."

An Arab League leader

For the record, this book cites a great deal of primary source material from Arab leaders themselves. Much of it, furthermore, contradicts current-day Arab sentiments and claims. As one Arab League leader admitted, for example, "everyone knows, Palestine does not exist."

Katz also shows that although the Paris League of Nations meeting accorded all of Palestine to the Jewish people, Britain unilaterally and illegally granted more than 80% of original Palestine to the Arabs, creating current day Jordan.

In short, Katz shows that the 1919 League of Nations vote to adopt the plan did not (as conventional wisdom now wrongly supposes) unilaterally impose a decision on the Arab peoples of the Middle East without their input. In fact, the League of Nations acted as direct result of a 1919 Arab treaty with Jewish leaders.

King Faisal's approval of plans for a National Home for the Jews was significant not least for its policy--and inclusion of current day Israel and all of current day Jordan. In 1919, the Emir Faisal wrote--and numerous scholarly, studies and population figures substantiate this point--there were few Arabs and many Jews in Palestine, and King Faisal saw the importance of recognizing the rights of the Jewish people to their homeland.

The book also shows that the Jewish people did not--as another common misconception holds--"steal" the land of Israel. On the contrary, beginning in the 1870s and 1880s, the Jewish Agency and many private groups and people purchased land (usually swamps and desert) from private absentee Arab landowners, often at wildly inflated prices.

Katz also carefully establishes the actual number of Arab refugees from the 1948 war against a nascent Israel that 7 Arab nations began in 1948. The correct number is 480,000, a number that Katz shows Arab leaders at the United Nations admitted at the time. Gradually, over the years, he also demonstrates, that number has been falsely inflated--a fact that even the United Nations admits. The "refugees" now include hundreds of thousands originally from other states, and their heirs.

Neither does Katz omit the nearly 1 million Jewish refugees booted from 22 Arab and Muslim lands between 1920 and 1978 with nothing but the shirts on their backs. (The dark motivations for mass ethnic cleansing of Jews from the Arab Middle East are exposed by Malka Hillel Shulewitz and Itamar Levin and Rachel Neiman in two books, The Forgotten Millions and Locked Doors.) Including the children and grandchildren of those Jewish refugees from Arab lands would raise their number today to more than 4 million, who together now account for more than half Israel's population.

And finally, Katz shows the central problem that has plagued Israeli-Arab relations since long before Israel was founded in 1948. Most Arab nations--from which the majority of people now known as Palestinian actually immigrated--have never recognized even the considerably reduced version of the Jewish state. Rather, they continue a permanent state of jihad war against non-Muslim infidels, rather than admit the Jewish people a right to self-determination, or a state governing the land in which Jewish inhabitants have remained since before the Romans sacked the second Temple in 70 A.D.

This book corrects reams of false propaganda that obscures the past and the Jewish right to a state in Israel.

--Alyssa A. Lappen

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Thank you for your feedback.

Report abuse | Permalink

Comment Comments (2)


23 of 23 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Dispels a number of myths about the Arab-Israeli conflict, December 4, 2004

By Jill Malter ([email protected]) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Battleground: Fact & Fantasy in Palestine (Paperback)

I think it's interesting to read history books by supporters and opponents of Israel. The ones by Israel's foes generally contain a surprising amount of misinformation. And that may be why books such as this one do not. Katz finds it easiest to support Israel by refuting antizionist lies, and he does so by telling the truth.

Katz traces the origins of the Arab war against Israel. That means supplying background material on the Jews of the Levant prior to modern Zionism. That helps us all realize that Jews had an important connection to and presence in the Levant during the many centuries between the defeats by the Romans and World War One. And it makes it clear that Jerusalem was not an Arab city in the latter quarter of the nineteenth century but virtually the only Asian city with a Jewish majority.

The book exposes many antizionist fabrications about the history of the region. Sometimes, antizionists tell us that Jerusalem is a holy city for the Arabs. But the author shows us that Jerusalem has been important to the Arabs only recently, when the Jews have ruled it. It is important now, because it is the Jewish capital, and because it would give the Arabs more esteem were they to deny the Jews their own capital city.

The author also goes into some detail about the role of Great Britain in the history of the region from the end of World War One until Israeli independence. He mentions the revelations of Richard Crossman about the intentions of Britain's foreign minister, Ernest Bevin, to destroy the Jews of the region rather than act as an honest broker between the Jews and Arabs. And Katz shows how Britain acted as an active participant in the confrontation, with the explicit purpose of preventing the establishment of a Jewish state by force. That includes the infamous White Paper of 1939, which drastically limited Jewish immigration to the region just when it was most needed for those attempting to avoid death at the hands of the Germans.

I think Katz is at his best in discussing a very prevalent lie we all see today, namely that Arabs have at least as much of a right to steal Israeli land as the Israelis do to keep it. And that the reason is that there is an Arabic-speaking subpeople that can live only on Israeli land.

We've seen this argument before. When Germans wanted to occupy Czechoslovakia in the 1930s, they pretended to do so on behalf of the German-speaking "Sudeten" people. These were Germans who happened to live in Czechoslovakia. But there was no symmetry between the desire of Czechs to enjoy human rights, protected by their government, and the desire of many Germans to deny human rights to the Czechs. And once the Germans obtained Czechoslovakia, the pretense of a Sudeten people was abandoned.

The author makes us aware of a similar problem today. While antizionists may imply that there is a huge Arab population that can live only on Jewish land, that's simply not the case. Katz explains that when Arabs controlled the entire West Bank from 1948 through 1967, not even allowing Jews to live there at all, there were no demands for a separate Arab state there. And he makes us realize that even an Arab victory against the Jews of the region would not produce peace: the Arabs would continue to fight against each other for the spoils. In addition, I think that since the Jews have not been the source of the problem, removing them will not solve it.

The author quotes a few Arabs who feel there will not and should not be peace in the region as long as Israel continues to exist as a Jewish state. And this is a major point. Many people have the misimpression that since there are more Arabs than Jews, the Arabs have a right to oppress or destroy the Jews. Or at least that history is on the side of the Arabs, who will get what they want whether they have a right to do so or not.

But I think readers of this book will come away from it aware that Israel is a nation like any other. And that it is land-poor, not land-rich. In peacetime, Israel, like the Netherlands or the Czech Republic, simply will not be defeated. To get rid of such nations, small as they are, would require a major crime. Obliterating the human rights of the Czechs, Dutch, or Hebrews would be a crime as well. Tacit approval of these crimes would set a very poor precedent for everyone, and thus such crimes are by no means inevitable.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Report abuse | Permalink

Comment Comment

Lifted from the Amazon . com page cited at top.

 

[docmauser1]

The rockets are in response to the un-ending missile attacks and occupation of Palestinian land. And since Israel is the aggressor, no, their actions are not justified and they are certainly not defensive, either.

It's pretty obvious that, our honorable billo_really has got his hands on some weapons-grade hashishshsh.

 

[Beelzebub]

Looks alright. We would probably get halvah more oftener than Christmas time.

Oops.

Hossfly declares unequivocally that he stands ready to - no - has given up on the USA and given all his allegiance to the fascist state between Egypt and Lebanon.

Is treason still a crime in America, or just a lifestyle choice?

 

[docmauser1]

Looks alright. We would probably get halvah more oftener than Christmas time.

Oops. Hossfly declares unequivocally that he stands ready to - no - has given up on the USA and given all his allegiance to the fascist state between Egypt and Lebanon. Is treason still a crime in America, or just a lifestyle choice?

Funny drivel.

 

[Mojo2]

Israel is responding to deadly attacks from Islamic terrorists.

How is it that you are so clueless?

Deadly attacks my ass!

They've only killed 26 people in 13 years.

How is it you're so fucking clueless?

Every rocket launched represents an attempted murder of at least one Israeli.

And the Palestinian bigots and racists have launched thousands.

Attempted Murder.

Attempted murder is the incomplete, unsuccessful act of killing someone. It is a serious criminal offense that, in all but a few cases of mitigating circumstances, can result in substantial prison time. Although the elements of the offense appear to be fairly straightforward, some issues of the attempted murder charge may lead to a dismissal or result in a lesser offense or penalty. A criminal defense lawyer can help you understand the elements of attempted murder.

Elements of Attempted Murder

In most jurisdictions, attempted murder charges consist of two elements:

The offender took some action towards killing another person
The offender’s act was intended to kill a person

Requirement of Direct Action

Any act that is directly done in furtherance of an intent to kill is a direct step. Merely preparing to kill someone or planning to do so is not sufficient to satisfy the elements of attempted murder. The required direct act may consist of using a weapon against another, such as a gun or knife, and either inflicting serious wounds or firing a weapon into someone’s chest or head, areas most likely to result in death. It also includes soliciting and paying someone to kill another person.

Other examples of acts that show an intent to murder are stalking or luring someone to a specific location where the murder is intended to take place or buying all the materials necessary to commit a murder, such as the makings of a bomb, and then driving to the person’s house to commit the act.

The Intent to Kill

Merely causing serious bodily harm or disfigurement to someone is not sufficient to prove attempted murder unless there is evidence of the actual intent to kill the person. For example, stabbing a person in the arm, by itself, does not show an intent to kill, but stabbing or shooting that person in the chest is more likely to satisfy the requisite intent.

It is not necessary to have the specific intent to actually kill the victim. The act of firing a gun into a residence and injuring a person who is not the intended target meets the elements of attempted murder because the offender showed an intent to kill by firing a firearm into an inhabited building. You can abandon your intent to murder someone if you do so before taking any direct step or action; deciding not to pay someone to kill another person or disposing of the materials you bought with the intent to kill are indications of an abandonment of the intent.

Penalties

Most jurisdictions have degrees of attempted murder charges. A first-degree attempted murder charge requires premeditation or a willful act; a second-degree attempted murder charge is any other act that is not planned or deliberate.

First-degree attempted murder carries greater penalties and often means a life sentence with the possibility of parole. Offenders typically spend at least 10 years in prison, although mandatory minimum sentences for attempting to murder a public official may be 10 to 15 years. Federal laws for attempting to kill a member of Congress or other federal official impose penalties ranging from 70 to 162 months.

Second-degree attempted murder penalties usually range from five years to 15 years in many states, depending on whether serious injury was inflicted. Sentences can be for longer periods if a firearm was used or if the crime was committed by a gang member or at the direction of a criminal gang. A prior criminal record will also enhance a sentence, even doubling it in states with “three strikes” laws, such as California.

Attempted Murder Charges and Penalties - Attorneys.com

 

[docmauser1]

One of his first lies is that the UN created Israel.

I'm not certain he was lying but I agree the UN did not create Israel. 716,700 Jewish and 156,000 non-Jewish soon-to-be Israelis did.

You forgot to mention illegally.

How so? The Sultan of the State of Palestine personally handed transfer papers over to Ben Gurion.

 

[Mojo2]

[im]http://s1.postimg.org/5iijwr1ov/Bt_ZMQLo_CMAAow_Zo.jpg[/img][/url

What if it turns out that the leading Arab/Muslims of that day agreed with the idea?

In short, Katz shows that...

the 1919 League of Nations vote to adopt the plan did not (as conventional wisdom now wrongly supposes) unilaterally impose a decision on the Arab peoples of the Middle East without their input.

In fact, the League of Nations acted as direct result of a 1919 Arab treaty with Jewish leaders.

http://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/0553117785/ref=acr_offerlistingpage_text?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1