Netanyahu to Attend a USS Liberty Memorial?

[Roudy]

lol. claiming land is holy doesn't give you a right to it.
based on what? what right?

Based on the fact that the land belonged to the Ottomans who joined the Germans in WWI and were defeated by the British who decided to allow the Jews to create a Jewish state while allocating 99.99% of the land in the ME that belonged to the Ottomans, to the Arab Muslims.

Arabs Muslims don't like it, and want it all? Tough shit.

Winston Churchill compared the Arabs wanting the Promised Land, in addition to the other 99% of the Middle East, to King Ahab wanting Naboth's little vineyard (the inheritance of his fathers).

The Muslims and Christians of Palestine wanted to keep their land. They did not want a bunch of Europeans stealing it from them. It's that simple.

Actually, it was the land stolen by the invading/ colonizing Egyptians, Syrians and Lebanese who dispossessed earlier settlers. The invading / colonizing Turks were pushed aside.

That's just illogical. How can "settlers" be the native inhabitants? How can the local inhabitants steal land from themselves? You are making a fool of yourself. LOL

You've gone off topic with your native bullshit twice in the same thread. What does native inhabitants have to do with the USS Liberty getting accidentally shot at by Israel? Actually, none of the acts of aggression against the Jewish state by Arabs were to form a "Palestinian state" or "native inhabitants". The Arabs themselves who ganged up and attacked Israel laughed at the idea of a Palestine or Palestinian people, since the there were no such things for the 1400 years of Muslim rule.

 

[Roudy]

super. so any claim of an anceswtral right to the land of israel is bullshit.

You can take out the ancestral part of it and since Israel has always been the religious holy land of the Jews thousands of years before Chraitianity and Muslim, then Jews have every right to establish a state there.

lol. claiming land is holy doesn't give you a right to it.

You can even take out the religious, and the Jews still have a right to establish a a democratic state in a region where 99.99% of the land is Islamic Shariah shitholes of intolerance and violence.

based on what? what right?

Based on the fact that the land belonged to the Ottomans who joined the Germans in WWI and were defeated by the British who decided to allow the Jews to create a Jewish state while allocating 99.99% of the land in the ME that belonged to the Ottomans, to the Arab Muslims.

Arabs Muslims don't like it, and want it all? Tough shit.

To the victor goes the spoils.

The British sponsored colonization and subsequent dispossession of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine was illegal pursuant to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of nations. Jews will not be able to rule indefinitely over a growing majority of non-Jews and it would be best that the Jews consider whether they will see a South African or a Rhodesian solution. If I were an Israeli Jew, I would try to work a South African type solution.

The British weren't the conquerors and they could have given the land to the Chinese if they so please. None of the Arabs or Muslims complained when the British brought a Saudi Arabian to rule Transjordan aka Arab Palestine, and elsewhere around the Middle East it was also the same.

 

[montelatici]

You can take out the ancestral part of it and since Israel has always been the religious holy land of the Jews thousands of years before Chraitianity and Muslim, then Jews have every right to establish a state there.

lol. claiming land is holy doesn't give you a right to it.

You can even take out the religious, and the Jews still have a right to establish a a democratic state in a region where 99.99% of the land is Islamic Shariah shitholes of intolerance and violence.

based on what? what right?

Based on the fact that the land belonged to the Ottomans who joined the Germans in WWI and were defeated by the British who decided to allow the Jews to create a Jewish state while allocating 99.99% of the land in the ME that belonged to the Ottomans, to the Arab Muslims.

Arabs Muslims don't like it, and want it all? Tough shit.

To the victor goes the spoils.

The British sponsored colonization and subsequent dispossession of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine was illegal pursuant to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of nations. Jews will not be able to rule indefinitely over a growing majority of non-Jews and it would be best that the Jews consider whether they will see a South African or a Rhodesian solution. If I were an Israeli Jew, I would try to work a South African type solution.

The British weren't the conquerors and they could have given the land to the Chinese if they so please. None of the Arabs or Muslims complained when the British brought a Saudi Arabian to rule Transjordan aka Arab Palestine, and elsewhere around the Middle East it was also the same.

The majority of the people of Trans-Jordania were Bedouins and Trans-Jordania had been part of the Arab Kingdom of Syria, already ruled by a Hashemite before the French occupied Damascus. Trans-Jordania was a return to the Crusader name for the territory, Oultrejordain.

The British signed the Covenant of the League of Nations which limited the tutelage and self determination to the inhabitants. Had this not been the case, the other allies, the U.S., France, Italy etc. would not have allowed Britain to become the Mandatory with unlimited power.

"ARTICLE 22.
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant....."

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

 

[Mindful]

lol. claiming land is holy doesn't give you a right to it.
based on what? what right?

Based on the fact that the land belonged to the Ottomans who joined the Germans in WWI and were defeated by the British who decided to allow the Jews to create a Jewish state while allocating 99.99% of the land in the ME that belonged to the Ottomans, to the Arab Muslims.

Arabs Muslims don't like it, and want it all? Tough shit.

To the victor goes the spoils.

The British sponsored colonization and subsequent dispossession of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine was illegal pursuant to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of nations. Jews will not be able to rule indefinitely over a growing majority of non-Jews and it would be best that the Jews consider whether they will see a South African or a Rhodesian solution. If I were an Israeli Jew, I would try to work a South African type solution.

The British weren't the conquerors and they could have given the land to the Chinese if they so please. None of the Arabs or Muslims complained when the British brought a Saudi Arabian to rule Transjordan aka Arab Palestine, and elsewhere around the Middle East it was also the same.

The majority of the people of Trans-Jordania were Bedouins and Trans-Jordania had been part of the Arab Kingdom of Syria, already ruled by a Hashemite before the French occupied Damascus. Trans-Jordania was a return to the Crusader name for the territory, Oultrejordain.

The British signed the Covenant of the League of Nations which limited the tutelage and self determination to the inhabitants. Had this not been the case, the other allies, the U.S., France, Italy etc. would not have allowed Britain to become the Mandatory with unlimited power.

"ARTICLE 22.
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant....."

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

You keep repeating the same things over and over again.

Not mentioning one thing Rabbi Saks has said.

 

[montelatici]

Based on the fact that the land belonged to the Ottomans who joined the Germans in WWI and were defeated by the British who decided to allow the Jews to create a Jewish state while allocating 99.99% of the land in the ME that belonged to the Ottomans, to the Arab Muslims.

Arabs Muslims don't like it, and want it all? Tough shit.

To the victor goes the spoils.

The British sponsored colonization and subsequent dispossession of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine was illegal pursuant to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of nations. Jews will not be able to rule indefinitely over a growing majority of non-Jews and it would be best that the Jews consider whether they will see a South African or a Rhodesian solution. If I were an Israeli Jew, I would try to work a South African type solution.

The British weren't the conquerors and they could have given the land to the Chinese if they so please. None of the Arabs or Muslims complained when the British brought a Saudi Arabian to rule Transjordan aka Arab Palestine, and elsewhere around the Middle East it was also the same.

The majority of the people of Trans-Jordania were Bedouins and Trans-Jordania had been part of the Arab Kingdom of Syria, already ruled by a Hashemite before the French occupied Damascus. Trans-Jordania was a return to the Crusader name for the territory, Oultrejordain.

The British signed the Covenant of the League of Nations which limited the tutelage and self determination to the inhabitants. Had this not been the case, the other allies, the U.S., France, Italy etc. would not have allowed Britain to become the Mandatory with unlimited power.

"ARTICLE 22.
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant....."

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

You keep repeating the same things over and over again.

Not mentioning one thing Rabbi Saks has said.

I just post facts. The ramblings of a Zionist are not of interest to me.

 

[Roudy]

lol. claiming land is holy doesn't give you a right to it.
based on what? what right?

Based on the fact that the land belonged to the Ottomans who joined the Germans in WWI and were defeated by the British who decided to allow the Jews to create a Jewish state while allocating 99.99% of the land in the ME that belonged to the Ottomans, to the Arab Muslims.

Arabs Muslims don't like it, and want it all? Tough shit.

To the victor goes the spoils.

The British sponsored colonization and subsequent dispossession of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine was illegal pursuant to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of nations. Jews will not be able to rule indefinitely over a growing majority of non-Jews and it would be best that the Jews consider whether they will see a South African or a Rhodesian solution. If I were an Israeli Jew, I would try to work a South African type solution.

The British weren't the conquerors and they could have given the land to the Chinese if they so please. None of the Arabs or Muslims complained when the British brought a Saudi Arabian to rule Transjordan aka Arab Palestine, and elsewhere around the Middle East it was also the same.

The majority of the people of Trans-Jordania were Bedouins and Trans-Jordania had been part of the Arab Kingdom of Syria, already ruled by a Hashemite before the French occupied Damascus. Trans-Jordania was a return to the Crusader name for the territory, Oultrejordain.

The British signed the Covenant of the League of Nations which limited the tutelage and self determination to the inhabitants. Had this not been the case, the other allies, the U.S., France, Italy etc. would not have allowed Britain to become the Mandatory with unlimited power.

"ARTICLE 22.
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant....."

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

Third time he went off topic to in the same thread and resorted to the repetitive propaganda.

 

[Roudy]

Based on the fact that the land belonged to the Ottomans who joined the Germans in WWI and were defeated by the British who decided to allow the Jews to create a Jewish state while allocating 99.99% of the land in the ME that belonged to the Ottomans, to the Arab Muslims.

Arabs Muslims don't like it, and want it all? Tough shit.

To the victor goes the spoils.

The British sponsored colonization and subsequent dispossession of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine was illegal pursuant to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of nations. Jews will not be able to rule indefinitely over a growing majority of non-Jews and it would be best that the Jews consider whether they will see a South African or a Rhodesian solution. If I were an Israeli Jew, I would try to work a South African type solution.

The British weren't the conquerors and they could have given the land to the Chinese if they so please. None of the Arabs or Muslims complained when the British brought a Saudi Arabian to rule Transjordan aka Arab Palestine, and elsewhere around the Middle East it was also the same.

The majority of the people of Trans-Jordania were Bedouins and Trans-Jordania had been part of the Arab Kingdom of Syria, already ruled by a Hashemite before the French occupied Damascus. Trans-Jordania was a return to the Crusader name for the territory, Oultrejordain.

The British signed the Covenant of the League of Nations which limited the tutelage and self determination to the inhabitants. Had this not been the case, the other allies, the U.S., France, Italy etc. would not have allowed Britain to become the Mandatory with unlimited power.

"ARTICLE 22.
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant....."

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

You keep repeating the same things over and over again.

Not mentioning one thing Rabbi Saks has said.

The guy is a drone. Same shit, different thread, over and over and over.

We're talking about the USS Liberty, and how the antisemites keep using it as an excuse to demonize Jews and Israel, right?

 

[montelatici]

To the victor goes the spoils.

The British sponsored colonization and subsequent dispossession of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine was illegal pursuant to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of nations. Jews will not be able to rule indefinitely over a growing majority of non-Jews and it would be best that the Jews consider whether they will see a South African or a Rhodesian solution. If I were an Israeli Jew, I would try to work a South African type solution.

The British weren't the conquerors and they could have given the land to the Chinese if they so please. None of the Arabs or Muslims complained when the British brought a Saudi Arabian to rule Transjordan aka Arab Palestine, and elsewhere around the Middle East it was also the same.

The majority of the people of Trans-Jordania were Bedouins and Trans-Jordania had been part of the Arab Kingdom of Syria, already ruled by a Hashemite before the French occupied Damascus. Trans-Jordania was a return to the Crusader name for the territory, Oultrejordain.

The British signed the Covenant of the League of Nations which limited the tutelage and self determination to the inhabitants. Had this not been the case, the other allies, the U.S., France, Italy etc. would not have allowed Britain to become the Mandatory with unlimited power.

"ARTICLE 22.
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant....."

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

You keep repeating the same things over and over again.

Not mentioning one thing Rabbi Saks has said.

The guy is a drone. Same shit, different thread, over and over and over.

We're talking about the USS Liberty, and how the antisemites keep using it as an excuse to demonize Jews and Israel, right?

You are the drone, repeating Hasbara propaganda over and over again. the facts have to brought to light every time I catch you lying. Since I am not on here 24/7 like you, you do slip some by and are so angry when I catch you. As your irritation at seeing the facts show.

 

[Mindful]

The British sponsored colonization and subsequent dispossession of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine was illegal pursuant to article 22 of the Covenant of the League of nations. Jews will not be able to rule indefinitely over a growing majority of non-Jews and it would be best that the Jews consider whether they will see a South African or a Rhodesian solution. If I were an Israeli Jew, I would try to work a South African type solution.

The British weren't the conquerors and they could have given the land to the Chinese if they so please. None of the Arabs or Muslims complained when the British brought a Saudi Arabian to rule Transjordan aka Arab Palestine, and elsewhere around the Middle East it was also the same.

The majority of the people of Trans-Jordania were Bedouins and Trans-Jordania had been part of the Arab Kingdom of Syria, already ruled by a Hashemite before the French occupied Damascus. Trans-Jordania was a return to the Crusader name for the territory, Oultrejordain.

The British signed the Covenant of the League of Nations which limited the tutelage and self determination to the inhabitants. Had this not been the case, the other allies, the U.S., France, Italy etc. would not have allowed Britain to become the Mandatory with unlimited power.

"ARTICLE 22.
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant....."

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

You keep repeating the same things over and over again.

Not mentioning one thing Rabbi Saks has said.

The guy is a drone. Same shit, different thread, over and over and over.

We're talking about the USS Liberty, and how the antisemites keep using it as an excuse to demonize Jews and Israel, right?

You are the drone, repeating Hasbara propaganda over and over again. the facts have to brought to light every time I catch you lying. Since I am not on here 24/7 like you, you do slip some by and are so angry when I catch you. As your irritation at seeing the facts show.

 

[fanger]

 

[Roudy]

More conspiracy BS. Let's see some attacks by Muslims that were without a doubt intentional:

 

[fanger]

USS Liberty Memorial
On June 8, 1967, US Navy intelligence ship USS Liberty was suddenly and brutally attacked on the high seas in international waters by the air and naval forces of Israel. The Israeli forces attacked with full knowledge that this was an American ship and lied about it. Survivors have been forbidden for 40 years to tell their story under oath to the American public. The USS Liberty Memorial web site tells their story and is dedicated to the memory of the 34 brave men who died.

 

[fanger]

 

[Roudy]

Why do you guys want to keep talking about an unintentional proven accident during the height of a war, while totally avoiding the tens of thousands of intentional attacks by Muslims and Arabs?

 

[fanger]

Yesterday was the Anniversary of the Israeli Attack, intentional, or otherwise, on the USS Liberty.
Under the video of the comments by the survivours roudy posts Funny?

Funny x 1
Roudy

 

[Lipush]

I guess he didn't show up on June 8th, eh.

He was busy, probably, wiping the blood of our people from the sidewalks of Tel Aviv.

Sorry for not attending.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Yesterday was the Anniversary of the Israeli Attack, intentional, or otherwise, on the USS Liberty.
Under the video of the comments by the survivours roudy posts Funny?

Funny x 1
Roudy

It's funny that people actually believe that Israelis would intentionally kill Americans.

 

[Roudy]

Yesterday was the Anniversary of the Israeli Attack, intentional, or otherwise, on the USS Liberty.
Under the video of the comments by the survivours roudy posts Funny?

Funny x 1
Roudy

It's funny that people actually believe that Israelis would intentionally kill Americans.

Demonization of Jews is nothing new. It's been going on for centuries.

 

[Lipush]

Sorry for some of my American friends if this may insult some of them.

But The American hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me.

The kill thousands in their Mid-East war, thousands innocents every year in conflict they have no business in, thousands with no name or people to attend their memorial services, but they will flag the USS Liberty, an ACCIDENT nobody meant to happen, for 100 years more, like they're not guilty of incidents 10 times more horrible.

Those men died in a terrible incident, but that is in the past. You should try and memorize the thousand of lives you keep ruining in the Mid-East, like you expect us to remember these sailors.