Care to comment on who was settlers and who were natives?Of course I heard of that desperate story writer. I have heard of many other
"writers" ROFLMAO @ "SONS OF SHEM" how poetic
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Care to comment on who was settlers and who were natives?Of course I heard of that desperate story writer. I have heard of many other
"writers" ROFLMAO @ "SONS OF SHEM" how poetic
why would you trot out the opinions of Ginzberg without studying who he was and what his place is in Jewish history?Have you ever heard of Ahab Ha'am?
The Jewish settlers] treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, trespass unjustly, beat them shamelessly for no sufficient reason, and even take pride in doing so. The Jews were slaves in the land of their Exile, and suddenly they found themselves with unlimited freedom, wild freedom that ONLY exists in a land like Turkey. This sudden change has produced in their hearts an inclination towards repressive tyranny, as always happens when slave rules." 'Ahad Ha'Am warned: "We are used to thinking of the Arabs as primitive men of the desert, as a donkey-like nation that neither sees nor understands what is going around it. But this is a GREAT ERROR. The Arab, like all sons of Sham, has sharp and crafty mind . . . Should time come when life of our people in Palestine imposes to a smaller or greater extent on the natives, they WILL NOT easily step aside." (One Palestine Complete, p.
So, according to Ahab, you are the settlers and they are the natives.
I gave you citations and explanations written by experts in the field and a writer of 242. They lay out all your errors and you don't read them. I'm not surprised.You say I'm wrong, but you can't say why? 242 was clear. You cannot hold onto land seized in a war. Period.
Did Israeli tanks roll into Egypt? Yes or no? You condescending prick!
SO? Gaza was not ready for WAR ---on October 7, 2024 either. YouHere you go...
For example, Mossad Chief Meir Amit observed at the time that “Egypt was not ready for a war; and Nasser did not want a war.” US President Johnson shared the evaluation of US intelligence networks with the Israelis that “..there is no Egyptian intention to make an imminent attack” Some years later, Menachem Begin candidly admitted that:
to what land do you refer? Approx 11,500 years ago--AsiansCare to comment on who was settlers and who were natives?
You assume a lot of bullshit! What makes you think I don't know who Ahad Ha'am was? Your whole argument is nothing but innuendo.why would you trot out the opinions of Ginzberg without studying who he was and what his place is in Jewish history?
First, because you quoted his name wrong, twice. Second, because you cite him to support a position which was not particularly persuasive or mainstream even when he made it, because of his personal politics.You assume a lot of bullshit! What makes you think I don't know who Ahad Ha'am was? Your whole argument is nothing but innuendo.
What you have been wrong about, I cited experts and historical fact to demonstrate. For this, I ask why you would cite someone whose views don't represent much other than his non-mainstream vision of the world.You say I'm wrong, but you can't say why. Then you try to make the argument about me. Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals.
You got his name wrong again and you assume that his position (one which is clearly at odds with documented history) is somehow normative and, without any evidence, the one you want to attach yourself to.Ahab Ha'am was a famous Zionist humanist and he confirms my argument that you are the settlers who moved into the area at the turn of the last century and the Palestinians are the natives who had been living there for at least 20 centuries.
You gave me a bullshit hit piece by the Jerusalem Post with a lot of word vomit. Tell me exactly in 242 where it says you can hold onto that land?I gave you citations and explanations written by experts in the field and a writer of 242. They lay out all your errors and you don't read them. I'm not surprised.
Here's a nice quote: "“The Jews threaten to make war. I reply: Welcome! We are ready for war.”"
Feel free to google it and check to see who said it and when.
Stop being so obtuse! You know exactly what land we are talking about. The land you MOVED TO at the turn of the last century.to what land do you refer? Approx 11,500 years ago--Asians
traveling via the Bering Strait SETTLED in ALASKA---they are
Asian people who SETTLED in Alaska. Their descendants are said to
constitute something like 20% of the population of Alaska
I gave you a few things including a legal treatise and information which quoted the writer of 242. You didn't read through it and now you ask questions? That's silly.You gave me a bullshit hit piece by the Jerusalem Post with a lot of word vomit. Tell me exactly in 242 where it says you can hold onto that land?
I did answer -- I cited the events which were acts of war by Egypt (I even gave you a citation to the laws being broken by them). Did you not read all that stuff?I also noticed you don't have the balls to answer my question about how the '67 war started. Did Israeli tanks roll into Egypt? Yes or no?
If Ahad Ha'am claimed that the arabs of Palestine had been living inYou assume a lot of bullshit! What makes you think I don't know who Ahad Ha'am was? Your whole argument is nothing but innuendo.
You say I'm wrong, but you can't say why. Then you try to make the argument about me. Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals.
Ahab Ha'am was a famous Zionist humanist and he confirms my argument that you are the settlers who moved into the area at the turn of the last century and the Palestinians are the natives who had been living there for at least 20 centuries.
I called him Ahab instead of Ahad, so my entire argument is wrong? That's what I mean about you and your bullshit innuendo.First, because you quoted his name wrong, twice. Second, because you cite him to support a position which was not particularly persuasive or mainstream even when he made it, because of his personal politics.
What you have been wrong about, I cited experts and historical fact to demonstrate. For this, I ask why you would cite someone whose views don't represent much other than his non-mainstream vision of the world.
You got his name wrong again and you assume that his position (one which is clearly at odds with documented history) is somehow normative and, without any evidence, the one you want to attach yourself to.
He said they were natives and you were settlers. What does that say?If Ahad Ha'am claimed that the arabs of Palestine had been living in
Palestine for "at least 20 centuries" ----he was wrong
No, just that you don't know his name so you are clearly not familiar with him and his works.I called him Ahab instead of Ahad, so my entire argument is wrong? That's what I mean about you and your bullshit innuendo.
You are trying to represent a position within Zionism but are citing someone who was not part of the main voice of Zionism. So i ask you why cite a fringe opinion? You have yet to answer.I also like how you are such an f-ing hypocrite by doing an about face and appealing to the majority, or as you would say, "...the mainstream opinion...", after I asked you to name one country on this planet to acknowledge Israel's right to that land.
Israeli tanks rolled in after Egypt commited an act of war under international law. Pretty simple, just like you!And still, you do not have the balls to answer my question about Israeli tanks rolling into Egypt? BTW, we both know why you don't!
So you can't say where 242 gives you that land? BTW, neither did your citations.I gave you a few things including a legal treatise and information which quoted the writer of 242. You didn't read through it and now you ask questions? That's silly.
I did answer -- I cited the events which were acts of war by Egypt (I even gave you a citation to the laws being broken by them). Did you not read all that stuff?
Again with your ad hominem's and bullshit innuendo. I quoted him word for word and you say that means I don't know anything about him? Boy, is that logical!No, just that you don't know his name so you are clearly not familiar with him and his works.
You are trying to represent a position within Zionism but are citing someone who was not part of the main voice of Zionism. So i ask you why cite a fringe opinion? You have yet to answer.
Israeli tanks rolled in after Egypt commited an act of war under international law. Pretty simple, just like you!
in the late 1900s to wit--the 1990s I moved to New Jersey. A few Arabs warrior invaders--invaded Palestine approximated 1300 years ago. Prior to that there were only a tiny population of arab caravan driversStop being so obtuse! You know exactly what land we are talking about. The land you MOVED TO at the turn of the last century.
that says that he did not know history all that well. Was he referringHe said they were natives and you were settlers. What does that say?
I gave you the precise discussion. You just don't want to read.So you can't say where 242 gives you that land? BTW, neither did your citations.
And no, you didn't answer my question. You're playing word games. Did Israeli tanks roll into Egypt? Yes or no?
You did quote him but did so trying to represent a position without knowing the position that Ginsberg held in the community.Again with your ad hominem's and bullshit innuendo. I quoted him word for word and you say that means I don't know anything about him? Boy, is that logical!
So you deny history. Got it.As fast as International law, Article 51 of the UN Charter states there are only 2 ways a country can attack another country, if you, yourself, were attacked, or you receive UNSC authorization to do so. Israel had neither in '67.