Let There Be Peace Already

[docmauser1]

So if someone is raping another person somewhere in the world, that makes it ok for you to rape someone where you are?

Ah, poor raped palistanians drivel.

 

[MJB12741]

Everything J.Stone says here is all true. Fact is there were no Christians during the lifetime of Jesus. Nor were there any Muslim Palestinians who later stole Israel's land.

If we go back far enough in our geneology, most Christians have a Jewish bloodline. The same as Jesus, John the Baptist & the apostles. To hate Jews is to hate their own heritage.

Jesus was Jewish. John the Baptist was Jewish. The Apostle Paul was Jewish. The authors of the 4 Gospels were likely all Jewish.

Baptism was originally a Jewish ritual of purification

For about the first 100 years after Jesus's death ca 30 CE, the Jesus movement was mostly a Jewish sect. Those wishing to follow Jesus were first required to convert to Judaism.

Well You have always been an ununified mob really,hense the 12 tribes of which there has never been real unification of the Jews, even today you are basically a country of different people from different parts of the world....who have little in common....apart from this artificial country called Israel.....non of you would be FULL-BLOOD Jews,if we took a look at your past.........and few related to each other. So your so called PURITY BULLSHIT is just that....you are bitsas like the rest of mankind a bit of this and a bit of that.


Palestinians would have a stonger claim of being pureblooded.


theliq bring into focus the future of jews

 

[Saigon]

Fact is there were no Christians during the lifetime of Jesus.

I'll let you think about that one for a few minutes and correct it yourself.

Think about names like Paul, Matthew, Peter...were they Christians?

 

[Hossfly]

Fact is there were no Christians during the lifetime of Jesus.

I'll let you think about that one for a few minutes and correct it yourself.

Think about names like Paul, Matthew, Peter...were they Christians?

Definition of CHRISTIAN



1

a: one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ

 

[Hossfly]

Fact is there were no Christians during the lifetime of Jesus.

I'll let you think about that one for a few minutes and correct it yourself.

Think about names like Paul, Matthew, Peter...were they Christians?

Definition of CHRISTIAN



1

a: one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ

They were Christians by definition only.

 

[MJB12741]

It is you who needs to think this over. Jesus was born & died a Jew. Only after his life on earth did Christianity begin by his followers, those who believed in Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Jews.

Fact is there were no Christians during the lifetime of Jesus.

I'll let you think about that one for a few minutes and correct it yourself.

Think about names like Paul, Matthew, Peter...were they Christians?

 

[JStone]

It is you who needs to think this over. Jesus was born & died a Jew. Only after his life on earth did Christianity begin by his followers, those who believed in Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Jews.

Fact is there were no Christians during the lifetime of Jesus.

I'll let you think about that one for a few minutes and correct it yourself.

Think about names like Paul, Matthew, Peter...were they Christians?

The Jesus Movement was a Jewish sect through 100 years after Jesus's death. In fact, in order to follow Jesus, converts needed to convert to Judaism.

John The Baptist was Jewish. His "baptism" was a Jewish ritual of purity.

The 4 Gospels were Jewish, too, as was Paul

 

[rhodescholar]

Rhodes -

To my way of thinking - continual habitation on a piece of land is the only real claim to international legitimacy.

I do not accept owenrship by conquest - not when Iraq invades Kuwait, or when Israel occupies the West Bank.

btw. Please try and limit and abuse and name-calling. If you need to do that to feel good, it suggests to me you don't have a great grasp of the topic.

btw. Would you mind telling us your experience/background in the Middle East on the other thread? I am trying to restrict my discussions now to people who are genuinely interested in this topic, and not just posting gossip and hate speech.

Continual habitation is not a legal foundation for claiming land anywhere on earth - just as a squatter cannot simply move into a building or onto someone else's land who happens to not be living there at the time - and claim it is theirs.

And if you do not accept ownership by conquest, you better start complaining about every country on earth - there is not a single one who has not occupied or is occupying the land of some group who they conquered at least part of it to attain their current dominion, arab muslims in particular.

It is only the left-wing media-fed frenzy along with plain old anti-semitism that props up the arab-israeli conflict to the level of mainstream attention it receives.

Further, to those of rational thought, it must seem rather strange that only the pal arabs have all of these "special" dispensations; they have their very own UN org dedicated to keeping them fed and supplied, they are the only refugee group ever created with their own distinct definition, etc. Clearly, there are huge dollars and political machinery - primarily directed from the decrepit arab muslim world using malleable, clueless lackeys in the West - that have worked to ensure that the worldwide political focus remains on israel, no matter how much worse others behave.

The fact that this section of the forum retains few if any threads on syria - a nation literally massacring its civilians daily - but many on israel.

 

[JStone]

Rhodes -

To my way of thinking - continual habitation on a piece of land is the only real claim to international legitimacy.

I do not accept owenrship by conquest - not when Iraq invades Kuwait, or when Israel occupies the West Bank.

btw. Please try and limit and abuse and name-calling. If you need to do that to feel good, it suggests to me you don't have a great grasp of the topic.

btw. Would you mind telling us your experience/background in the Middle East on the other thread? I am trying to restrict my discussions now to people who are genuinely interested in this topic, and not just posting gossip and hate speech.

Continual habitation is not a legal foundation for claiming land anywhere on earth - just as a squatter cannot simply move into a building or onto someone else's land who happens to not be living there at the time - and claim it is theirs.

And if you do not accept ownership by conquest, you better start complaining about every country on earth - there is not a single one who has not occupied or is occupying the land of some group who they conquered at least part of it to attain their current dominion, arab muslims in particular.

It is only the left-wing media-fed frenzy along with plain old anti-semitism that props up the arab-israeli conflict to the level of mainstream attention it receives.

Further, to those of rational thought, it must seem rather strange that only the pal arabs have all of these "special" dispensations; they have their very own UN org dedicated to keeping them fed and supplied, they are the only refugee group ever created with their own distinct definition, etc. Clearly, there are huge dollars and political machinery - primarily directed from the decrepit arab muslim world using malleable, clueless lackeys in the West - that have worked to ensure that the worldwide political focus remains on israel, no matter how much worse others behave.

The fact that this section of the forum retains few if any threads on syria - a nation literally massacring its civilians daily - but many on israel.

From a strictly legal standpoint, the Jews have prior possession to Israel dating back 3000 years when Israeli sovereignty was established which Jews have never relinquished to today. While Israel has been occupied through the years by foreign invaders, Jews have maintained a continual presence in Israel for 3 millenia

First rule of property law: First in time, first in right

 

[P F Tinmore]

And those pesky Palestinians are not just going to walk away from their country.

 

[JStone]

And those pesky Palestinians are not just going to walk away from their country.:clp2::cap2::clp2:

Those fakestinians are merely rebranded arabs from egypt and saudi arabia who migrated to Israel a few years ago to glomb off of Jewish success. This is no secret

That's why you can't name "their" country, because, they never had one., except their countries of origin

No reputation points for you

 

[MJB12741]

You bring up a valid point. Why not more on what is going on in Syria? Middle East Muslim terrorists massacring each other in record numbers. What greater contribution to peace, mankind & civilization? Long live the Arab Spring.

Rhodes -

To my way of thinking - continual habitation on a piece of land is the only real claim to international legitimacy.

I do not accept owenrship by conquest - not when Iraq invades Kuwait, or when Israel occupies the West Bank.

btw. Please try and limit and abuse and name-calling. If you need to do that to feel good, it suggests to me you don't have a great grasp of the topic.

btw. Would you mind telling us your experience/background in the Middle East on the other thread? I am trying to restrict my discussions now to people who are genuinely interested in this topic, and not just posting gossip and hate speech.

Continual habitation is not a legal foundation for claiming land anywhere on earth - just as a squatter cannot simply move into a building or onto someone else's land who happens to not be living there at the time - and claim it is theirs.

And if you do not accept ownership by conquest, you better start complaining about every country on earth - there is not a single one who has not occupied or is occupying the land of some group who they conquered at least part of it to attain their current dominion, arab muslims in particular.

It is only the left-wing media-fed frenzy along with plain old anti-semitism that props up the arab-israeli conflict to the level of mainstream attention it receives.

Further, to those of rational thought, it must seem rather strange that only the pal arabs have all of these "special" dispensations; they have their very own UN org dedicated to keeping them fed and supplied, they are the only refugee group ever created with their own distinct definition, etc. Clearly, there are huge dollars and political machinery - primarily directed from the decrepit arab muslim world using malleable, clueless lackeys in the West - that have worked to ensure that the worldwide political focus remains on israel, no matter how much worse others behave.

The fact that this section of the forum retains few if any threads on syria - a nation literally massacring its civilians daily - but many on israel.

 

[JStone]

You bring up a valid point. Why not more on what is going on in Syria? Middle East Muslim terrorists massacring each other in record numbers. What greater contribution to peace, mankind & civilization? Long live the Arab Spring.

Rhodes -

To my way of thinking - continual habitation on a piece of land is the only real claim to international legitimacy.

I do not accept owenrship by conquest - not when Iraq invades Kuwait, or when Israel occupies the West Bank.

btw. Please try and limit and abuse and name-calling. If you need to do that to feel good, it suggests to me you don't have a great grasp of the topic.

btw. Would you mind telling us your experience/background in the Middle East on the other thread? I am trying to restrict my discussions now to people who are genuinely interested in this topic, and not just posting gossip and hate speech.

Continual habitation is not a legal foundation for claiming land anywhere on earth - just as a squatter cannot simply move into a building or onto someone else's land who happens to not be living there at the time - and claim it is theirs.

And if you do not accept ownership by conquest, you better start complaining about every country on earth - there is not a single one who has not occupied or is occupying the land of some group who they conquered at least part of it to attain their current dominion, arab muslims in particular.

It is only the left-wing media-fed frenzy along with plain old anti-semitism that props up the arab-israeli conflict to the level of mainstream attention it receives.

Further, to those of rational thought, it must seem rather strange that only the pal arabs have all of these "special" dispensations; they have their very own UN org dedicated to keeping them fed and supplied, they are the only refugee group ever created with their own distinct definition, etc. Clearly, there are huge dollars and political machinery - primarily directed from the decrepit arab muslim world using malleable, clueless lackeys in the West - that have worked to ensure that the worldwide political focus remains on israel, no matter how much worse others behave.

The fact that this section of the forum retains few if any threads on syria - a nation literally massacring its civilians daily - but many on israel.

About 2 million have been slaughtered in Darfur thus far by the religion of murderers with barely a peep

 

[ima]

You bring up a valid point. Why not more on what is going on in Syria? Middle East Muslim terrorists massacring each other in record numbers. What greater contribution to peace, mankind & civilization? Long live the Arab Spring.

Rhodes -

To my way of thinking - continual habitation on a piece of land is the only real claim to international legitimacy.

I do not accept owenrship by conquest - not when Iraq invades Kuwait, or when Israel occupies the West Bank.

btw. Please try and limit and abuse and name-calling. If you need to do that to feel good, it suggests to me you don't have a great grasp of the topic.

btw. Would you mind telling us your experience/background in the Middle East on the other thread? I am trying to restrict my discussions now to people who are genuinely interested in this topic, and not just posting gossip and hate speech.

Continual habitation is not a legal foundation for claiming land anywhere on earth - just as a squatter cannot simply move into a building or onto someone else's land who happens to not be living there at the time - and claim it is theirs.

And if you do not accept ownership by conquest, you better start complaining about every country on earth - there is not a single one who has not occupied or is occupying the land of some group who they conquered at least part of it to attain their current dominion, arab muslims in particular.

It is only the left-wing media-fed frenzy along with plain old anti-semitism that props up the arab-israeli conflict to the level of mainstream attention it receives.

Further, to those of rational thought, it must seem rather strange that only the pal arabs have all of these "special" dispensations; they have their very own UN org dedicated to keeping them fed and supplied, they are the only refugee group ever created with their own distinct definition, etc. Clearly, there are huge dollars and political machinery - primarily directed from the decrepit arab muslim world using malleable, clueless lackeys in the West - that have worked to ensure that the worldwide political focus remains on israel, no matter how much worse others behave.

The fact that this section of the forum retains few if any threads on syria - a nation literally massacring its civilians daily - but many on israel.

Syria has no Jews, so the media doesn't focus on that. And with no Jews AND no oil, the US/Haliburton isn't interested either.

 

[Hossfly]

You bring up a valid point. Why not more on what is going on in Syria? Middle East Muslim terrorists massacring each other in record numbers. What greater contribution to peace, mankind & civilization? Long live the Arab Spring.

Continual habitation is not a legal foundation for claiming land anywhere on earth - just as a squatter cannot simply move into a building or onto someone else's land who happens to not be living there at the time - and claim it is theirs.

And if you do not accept ownership by conquest, you better start complaining about every country on earth - there is not a single one who has not occupied or is occupying the land of some group who they conquered at least part of it to attain their current dominion, arab muslims in particular.

It is only the left-wing media-fed frenzy along with plain old anti-semitism that props up the arab-israeli conflict to the level of mainstream attention it receives.

Further, to those of rational thought, it must seem rather strange that only the pal arabs have all of these "special" dispensations; they have their very own UN org dedicated to keeping them fed and supplied, they are the only refugee group ever created with their own distinct definition, etc. Clearly, there are huge dollars and political machinery - primarily directed from the decrepit arab muslim world using malleable, clueless lackeys in the West - that have worked to ensure that the worldwide political focus remains on israel, no matter how much worse others behave.

The fact that this section of the forum retains few if any threads on syria - a nation literally massacring its civilians daily - but many on israel.

Syria has no Jews, so the media doesn't focus on that. And with no Jews AND no oil, the US/Haliburton isn't interested either.

Don't bet on it.

 

[JStone]

You bring up a valid point. Why not more on what is going on in Syria? Middle East Muslim terrorists massacring each other in record numbers. What greater contribution to peace, mankind & civilization? Long live the Arab Spring.

Continual habitation is not a legal foundation for claiming land anywhere on earth - just as a squatter cannot simply move into a building or onto someone else's land who happens to not be living there at the time - and claim it is theirs.

And if you do not accept ownership by conquest, you better start complaining about every country on earth - there is not a single one who has not occupied or is occupying the land of some group who they conquered at least part of it to attain their current dominion, arab muslims in particular.

It is only the left-wing media-fed frenzy along with plain old anti-semitism that props up the arab-israeli conflict to the level of mainstream attention it receives.

Further, to those of rational thought, it must seem rather strange that only the pal arabs have all of these "special" dispensations; they have their very own UN org dedicated to keeping them fed and supplied, they are the only refugee group ever created with their own distinct definition, etc. Clearly, there are huge dollars and political machinery - primarily directed from the decrepit arab muslim world using malleable, clueless lackeys in the West - that have worked to ensure that the worldwide political focus remains on israel, no matter how much worse others behave.

The fact that this section of the forum retains few if any threads on syria - a nation literally massacring its civilians daily - but many on israel.

Syria has no Jews, so the media doesn't focus on that. And with no Jews AND no oil, the US/Haliburton isn't interested either.

How many mirrors have cracked when you've looked into them, ugly face?

 

[ima]

You bring up a valid point. Why not more on what is going on in Syria? Middle East Muslim terrorists massacring each other in record numbers. What greater contribution to peace, mankind & civilization? Long live the Arab Spring.

Syria has no Jews, so the media doesn't focus on that. And with no Jews AND no oil, the US/Haliburton isn't interested either.

Don't bet on it.

I wouldn't bet against Haliburton in a million years. They're probably trying right now to cost out invading Iran, versus how many soldiers will die, versus how much money they make. If their calculations end in an obscene amount of profit for themselves, we'll invade Iran as soon as there's a republican prez.

 

[JStone]

Syria has no Jews, so the media doesn't focus on that. And with no Jews AND no oil, the US/Haliburton isn't interested either.

Don't bet on it.

I wouldn't bet against Haliburton in a million years. They're probably trying right now to cost out invading Iran, versus how many soldiers will die, versus how much money they make. If their calculations end in an obscene amount of profit for themselves, we'll invade Iran as soon as there's a republican prez.

Halliburton didn't make you so physically repulsive. Why be angry at them?

 

[Hossfly]

Syria has no Jews, so the media doesn't focus on that. And with no Jews AND no oil, the US/Haliburton isn't interested either.

Don't bet on it.

I wouldn't bet against Haliburton in a million years. They're probably trying right now to cost out invading Iran, versus how many soldiers will die, versus how much money they make. If their calculations end in an obscene amount of profit for themselves, we'll invade Iran as soon as there's a republican prez.

I was primarily speaking of the US. Haliburton, an oilfield services company, shouldn't be part of the equation. I think you're just blowing smoke so you can hear the wind whistle thru your ears.

 

[rhodescholar]

And those pesky Palestinians are not just going to walk away from their country.

What country is that, fuckbrain?

You're a little late, they already walked away from syria, egypt and jordan about 75 years ago.