So why do people hate Israel? - Page 126




 
--
 
April 7th, 2013  
ScarabVenom
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
It looks better. It sounds better because you can use wasapi drivers which is not possible in XP. My sound goes from the HDD, bypasses Windows, via my graphics card directly to my Rx. I use a HDMI connection. I can't say if the software runs faster on XP because at the same time I changed my CPU, motherboard and memmory.



I have no Dell computer. It's selfmade with different parts. I did have that problem with Windows registration. Installation went fine, including registration (that went, to my surprise, automatically) but later Microsoft wanted me to registrate again and I used the code that was supplied with the Windows 7 disk and all went fine. I have no problems with upgrades.
You mean Linux as the free OS?
Technically, you changed your entire computer besides the HDD. Just the "looks better" uses some RAM.

Well, the thing is, my Microsoft sells each product key for one PC. Maybe after a while, it will decide that your Windows is not Genuine. I did this before, used a laptop's Windows license key in another laptop and although it got activated and had no problem with upgrading, after a few months, it said that my Windows is not Genuine and gave me the black screen crap.

Yup, I meant Linux. If you want, you can use Ubuntu which is the closest Linux distro to Windows, it has a GUI and is pretty user friendly, just takes a bit to get used to. And also it's much faster than Windows since for Linux you're secure enough to run the system without a security software or an anti-virus and even if you get a virus, it will be very very very less likely to work since the vast majority of viruses are written to run on Windows. And if you want to run Windows applications on any Linux distro, just get a piece of software called Wine, which will run the most common Windows programs; that's of course if you didn't find the Linux version already. You ever used any Linux distro before?
April 7th, 2013  
BritinBritain
 
 
Isn't there a computer thread somewhere else?
April 7th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
As usual, you attempt the standard Hasbara troll ploy of diverting the point. What was said was nothing to do with Turkey or any other country, it was about Israel which regardless of your blind stupidity cannot be a democracy (as proven several times previously) as it has a two class system for Jews and non Jewish citizens, facts clearly demonstrated by any number of agencies including Israelis. The declaration of the State of Israel does not mention Democracy or Democratic anywhere in it's entire text.
Ever looked at the Australian constitution? Try to find the word "democracy". So, according to your logic Australia is not a democracy!
To me, Australia is a democracy. You don't know what democracy is.
"Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy allows eligible citizens to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination."

Election rules in Israel :

"Every citizen aged 21 or older is eligible for election to the Knesset, provided they have no criminal record, do not hold an official position (the president, state comptroller, judges and senior public officials, as well as the chief-of-staff and high-ranking military officers, may not stand for election to the Knesset unless they have resigned their position at least 100 days before the elections), and the court has not specifically restricted this right (for example, in the rare case of a person convicted of treason)."

Quote:
Now you are just being obtuse (even more than usual) with the Nakba being almost as well documented as the holocaust.
Here's the truth about the Nakba :

Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), the “president” of the Palestinian Authority, who wrote this in an article in the Beirut magazine Falastin el-Thawra, in March 1976. (Item cited in the weekly column by Ben-Dror Yemini in Maariv, May 27, 2011.)

"The Arab armies seemingly entered Palestine [in 1948] to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe, as if we were condemned to change places with them. The Arab States succeeded in scattering the Palestinian people and in destroying their unity."

Quote:
Once again your Hasbara training shows through as you attempt to redirect the point. No one mentioned an uprising. In fact "uprisings" have nothing to do with it. You asked
So, NO uprisings nor rebellions. Got it.

Quote:
To want what is yours does not require an uprising, as you are well aware.
It was not theirs, they lived there, just like the Jews and immigrants from different countries. The Turks and later the British Mandate owned it.
--
April 7th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Please quote where I allegedly said that Palestine was the Jewish "homeland" prior to the Roman occupation, it was no more a Jewish homeland then, than it became the Roman homeland after their arrival. It may have been the land where they lived , but they lived in many other places too as is shown when they allegedly arrived and defeated the Canaanites. As has been stated several times, there would not be very many people on the planet who could not claim that at some time or another their distant ancestors lived in this area.

All of the above not withstanding, modern Jews still have no special claim to it, the same as no other religious group, race or individuals have a "claim" to a place where some of their ancestors may have lived at some time in the past.
Wow, distraction. A quote from another tread. Are you trying to mislead the reader?
here's part of your quote:

"the Roman's occupied it the same as the Jews did"

In those times if you wanted a homeland for your people you had to occupy it otherwise you were doomed. History is full of battles and conquests. So the Jews settled there way before some people start to call themselves Palestinians.

Quote:
Your Hasbara training is showing again? I noticed that you used the word "Muslims", you carefully avoided calling them Arabs or Palestinians because you know that the people known today as Palestinian Arabs are the descendants of the earliest known people of the area. The fact that they did not convert to Islam until the 7th century has no bearing on the matter. As has already been shown most Ashkenazi Jews were descended from the Khazars and are actually more closely related to the Kurds, their homeland being in Northern Iraq and southern Turkey. They are thought to have converted to Judaism about the same time. (as mentioned in many historical texts including The Encyclopedia Judaica)
Another ridiculous answer. If we go all the way back in history we all end up somewhere in southern Africa. Does that mean that we all can claim that land? It's about societies dummy, and the Jews still speak the same language, have the same culture and the same religion. That cannot be said of your "Palestinians" who integrated into different societies.

Quote:
You really need to catch up on world affairs. Australians do not claim to have a "Right" to this land, and it is enshrined in Australian Law, that the land belongs to the Aboriginal people.
Show me a link to that law. It isn't stated in the Australian constitution. In fact, from 1967 onwards the Aborigines are counted as Australians.

Tell me why does survival for tribal peoples say: "Although a landmark judgment in 1992 finally threw out the racist ‘terra nullius’ principle, the government has since done everything it can to obstruct Aboriginals reclaiming title over their lands.

Despite the many hurdles placed in their way, however, some Aboriginal groups such as the Martu of western Australia are finally securing ownership titles to their land.
" ?

Quote:
They in turn, have chosen to become "Australians" as defined in Law, and we non Aboriginal Australians, actually rent this land, every Aboriginal and part Aboriginal man, woman and child receives an agreed payment, (About A$80 p.w. last time I asked) They are also entitled to free medical benefits and many other special payments not available to non Aboriginals, for furthering their Cultural needs, education, health and business etc.
They did not choose to become Australians, they were called Australians by law by the Australian government in 1967.

Quote:
And the European Jews did not "emigrate", they invaded as illegal immigrants after WWII, as no authority gave them a visa or other document as required to emigrate. In fact the Brits made repeated attempts to send many back to Europe but eventually succumbed to Zionist Terror groups. (King David Hotel, murdering of British troops etc.) A fact that you are well aware of and has all been documented here previously.
Are we living on the same planet??? You don't need a visa to emmigrate you need a visa to enter another country if that country requires it. An immigrant, legal or illegal, is not an invader.

What the Brits did was in violation of their mandate.

Quote:
The The Brits were only mandated to "administer the land in the interests of it's people", any other decision not fulfilling that condition is not covered and therefore illegal. Had the Palestinians agreed to a Jewish homeland being established there, that would have been a different matter, ,... but it was not.
Again you are misinformed.

The Palestine Mandate

Art.2 : "The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion."

art.6 : "The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."

You don't need a Visa to enter your own homeland.
April 7th, 2013  
ScarabVenom
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BritinAfrica
Isn't there a computer thread somewhere else?
Yup, back on topic.
April 7th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
In those times if you wanted a homeland for your people you had to occupy it otherwise you were doomed.
Occupied lands are not your Homeland. Your homeland is that of your origin, otherwise the Homeland of most Israelis is Eastern Europe. As has been pointed out to you several times previously, you can't just hand pick at which time you want to claim a place was your homeland. The whole "homeland" thing for them is no more than religious twaddle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
If we go all the way back in history we all end up somewhere in southern Africa. Does that mean that we all can claim that land?
If we want to play the Zionist game,... Yes. That is why their alleged "claim" to Palestine is fraudulent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Show me a link to that law. It isn't stated in the Australian constitution. In fact, from 1967 onwards the Aborigines are counted as Australians.
Our Constitution does not contain every law pertaining to Australia it is merely a basis for our Law. I do not have access to all the laws and Acts, even full time Lawyers usually only keep such parts as are applicable to their speciality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Tell me why does survival for tribal peoples say: "Although a landmark judgment in 1992 finally threw out the racist ‘terra nullius’ principle, the government has since done everything it can to obstruct Aboriginals reclaiming title over their lands.
Despite the many hurdles placed in their way, however, some Aboriginal groups such as the Martu of western Australia are finally securing ownership titles to their land.
" ?
All claims are negotiated as per the agreement that they are party to. As your own last sentence indicates once the negotiation is completed and their claim is found to be legitimate they are granted it. Otherwise any Aboriginal group could just claim any piece of land as having been their traditional land, and there have been a number of cases of this being attempted, sometimes successfully sometimes not but they are given the benefit of the doubt wherever possible. Even the various clans and tribes dispute the boundaries of their tribal lands, many overlapped and some places still have not been claimed, virtually all inter tribal warfare was as a result of this. This disputation goes on to this day and is usually the major bottleneck in negotiations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
They did not choose to become Australians, they were called Australians by law by the Australian government in 1967.
Show me where you found that, because In fact they were always Australians, it's just that at that time they were asked if they wished to become known as that officially on all successive legal documentation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Are we living on the same planet??? You don't need a visa to emmigrate you need a visa to enter another country if that country requires it. An immigrant, legal or illegal, is not an invader.
He is when he drives the population off his land and occupies it taking his land and possessions refusing to allow his return. So, what planet is it that you live on,... as I am clearly on Earth?


Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
What the Brits did was in violation of their mandate.
The Palestine Mandate

Art.2 : "The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion."

art.6 : "The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."

You don't need a Visa to enter your own homeland.
Before we even start read line one of Article 6.

Only if you hold current citizenship in that homeland, I can't just roll up and move into places where my ancestors once lived, without proper documentation. Palestine was never ratified as a as a Jewish homeland though was it? It was only ever a "recommendation" as were several other places.

It was in fact occupied by illegal immigrants who deliberately drove the native population off their land. In answer to the second part of Article 6., The Brits had already clearly stated that all the land was taken and there was no "waste" land for Jews or anyone else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Ever looked at the Australian constitution? Try to find the word "democracy". So, according to your logic Australia is not a democracy!
To me, Australia is a democracy. You don't know what democracy is.
"Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.
Enough said, there's your answer. Palestinians or Arabs living In Israel do not have this as shown almost daily tn the press http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/p...n-country.html and as reported by any number of International bodies. All of which has been covered here before.
Quote:
In every Arab community, and in the five mixed cities where both Jews and Arabs live, de facto discrimination is readily apparent. Israel's 1.37 million Arab citizens vote, pay taxes and speak Hebrew, yet suffer pervasive discrimination, unequal allocation of resources and violation of their legal rights. Housing, education, and income all substantially lag that of the Jewish majority. Only 3 percent of the land in Israel proper is owned by Arabs; permits are rarely granted to Arab families to expand their housing; and most Jewish towns and neighborhoods remain off-limits.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/schoo...equal-1.443811

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Here's the truth about the Nakba :
Thank you,.... so you admit that it happened. There is no excuse as to why, as the Israelis were virtually all illegal immigrants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
During the 1948 Palestine War, an estimated 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled, and hundreds of Palestinian villages were depopulated and destroyed.[2][3]
These refugees and their descendants number several million people today, divided between Jordan (2 million), Lebanon (427,057), Syria (477,700), the West Bank (788,108) and the Gaza Strip (1.1 million), with at least another quarter of a million internally displaced Palestinians in Israel.[4] The displacement, dispossession and dispersal of the Palestinian people is known to them as an-Nakba, meaning "catastrophe" or "disaster”.[5][6][7]"
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
It was not theirs, they lived there, just like the Jews and immigrants from different countries. The Turks and later the British Mandate owned it.
The land "belonged" to the Palestinians, a fact recognised by the Hussein McMahon agreement. Neither the Turks nor the Brits owned it, a fact that you got wrong last time we went through all this and you admitted it. It was "occupied" by the Turks and "Adminstered" by the Brits on behalf of the Palestinian people. They never ever owned it.

I fully realise that you are just trying on the old Hasbara Troll ploy of endless repetition of previously disproven points, so unless you start coming up with some facts I'm going to stop answering. Virtually all that you have said has been shown to be wrong at least once before. By facts, I mean facts as recognised by the International community, not Zionist "facts".
April 8th, 2013  
Yossarian
 
 
Even in a tranquil state of future affairs, the evolution of the next generation of monetary systems in regard to world reserve currency after the looming collapse of the dollar and deglobilisation of world economies due to exploding fossil fuel prices. Will rewrite geopolitical interest in this region of the world from the current card holders.

What I am saying, is that these future world issues will pert-rude into this ongoing struggle between Israel and Palestine in a fashion of the reallocation of Middle Eastern Affairs back to being primarily dictated by Middle Eastern Nations.

Western support and influence in the region will evaporate when the complex network of political statesmanship designed to secure continued access to cheap fuels from the region is no longer applicable due to the inability for unlimited growth economies now plaguing the West and the entire globe to afford the more expensive Energy Return to Energy Invested ratio of drilling the "crappy" stuff out of this region anymore.

These problems will lead to reverse foreign aid and interest in supporting Israel to largely landing them on their own in a back yard of enemies. Without direct foreign interests of keeping Israel heavily armed as a base of operations throughout the Middle East to secure economic avenues of fossil fuels at cheap prices critical to our mass consumerist societies. Which wane the ability for the West to become involved, let alone interested in foreign affairs amidst sudden domestic energy shock and deindustrialization. This will place Israel back on an almost even playing field with it's neighbors.

Where this future lands Palestine, may be much different in our currently assumed future for the fledgling Palestinian state and their struggle.

IN SHORT: The world will be in it's own calamity to care as much as squander remaining resources in an cheap energy starved climate to continue the bolstering of Israel, on the same token even on protecting what's left of Palestine. Regional powers in the Middle East will once again assume dominance of the region free of outside influence to decide what kind of climate Israeli actions will be met with.

And if current affairs are any indication, when this global network of foreign policy being the catalyst of securing in one fashion or another cheap economic resources slows down after the implosion of Global Economies bases solely on cheap energy. Israeli intentions whether they feel threatened or not with Palestine will also be less scrutinized, and maybe we haven't seen nothing yet.
April 8th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Occupied lands are not your Homeland. Your homeland is that of your origin, otherwise the Homeland of most Israelis is Eastern Europe. As has been pointed out to you several times previously, you can't just hand pick at which time you want to claim a place was your homeland. The whole "homeland" thing for them is no more than religious twaddle.
Well, that origin is in southern Africa for all of us. Does that mean that that place is our homeland?
You can't pick at which time to claim a place was your homeland? That's exactly what you do!

Quote:
If we want to play the Zionist game,... Yes. That is why their alleged "claim" to Palestine is fraudulent.
That's proof of your inability to give a serious answer.

Quote:
Our Constitution does not contain every law pertaining to Australia it is merely a basis for our Law. I do not have access to all the laws and Acts, even full time Lawyers usually only keep such parts as are applicable to their speciality.
Another evading answer.

Quote:
All claims are negotiated as per the agreement that they are party to. As your own last sentence indicates once the negotiation is completed and their claim is found to be legitimate they are granted it. Otherwise any Aboriginal group could just claim any piece of land as having been their traditional land, and there have been a number of cases of this being attempted, sometimes successfully sometimes not but they are given the benefit of the doubt wherever possible. Even the various clans and tribes dispute the boundaries of their tribal lands, many overlapped and some places still have not been claimed, virtually all inter tribal warfare was as a result of this. This disputation goes on to this day and is usually the major bottleneck in negotiations.
So your saying in post #1250 ("that the land belongs to the Aboriginal people") is wrong.

Quote:
Show me where you found that, because In fact they were always Australians, it's just that at that time they were asked if they wished to become known as that officially on all successive legal documentation.
Australian constitution Chapter VII no 127 : "Aborigines not to be counted in reckoning population. Repealed by No. 55, 1967, s. 3"

Quote:
He is when he drives the population off his land and occupies it taking his land and possessions refusing to allow his return. So, what planet is it that you live on,... as I am clearly on Earth?
But the Jews didn't do that. They settled on uninhabited land or bought the land from someone already living there. That's completely legal. They did even more, they transformed arid land into farmland and gave work to local people and immigrants from neighboring countries. Your knowledge is very selective.

Quote:
Before we even start read line one of Article 6.

Only if you hold current citizenship in that homeland, I can't just roll up and move into places where my ancestors once lived, without proper documentation. Palestine was never ratified as a as a Jewish homeland though was it? It was only ever a "recommendation" as were several other places.

It was in fact occupied by illegal immigrants who deliberately drove the native population off their land. In answer to the second part of Article 6., The Brits had already clearly stated that all the land was taken and there was no "waste" land for Jews or anyone else.
EVERY citizen in the Mandate of Palestine, legal or illegal, got the same citizenship. So they also should have the same rights but the British backed down on Arab pressure and limited Jewish imigration with the fallacy that there wasn't much land anymore. At that time less than 1 million people lived there. Know more than 6 million.

Jews and "Palestinians" got the same citizenship, same rights. So no occupation because they both lived in the same country as equal citizens. Not doing so is racism.

Quote:
Enough said, there's your answer. Palestinians or Arabs living In Israel do not have this as shown almost daily tn the press http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/p...n-country.html and as reported by any number of International bodies. All of which has been covered here before.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/schoo...equal-1.443811
Those articles, my friend, are not facts but opinions. As I have proved before there are many of your so called second class citizens who are elected to the Knesset or have high-ranking positions.

Quote:
Thank you,.... so you admit that it happened. There is no excuse as to why, as the Israelis were virtually all illegal immigrants.
What a twist of the truth. The "why" is very important because it is caused by the Arabs, not the Israelis. This is a FACT. Second, there were no illegal immigrants living in Israel at that time.

About your wiki link, most of them fled, as was acknowledged by the present leader of the Palestinians. I already gave you that fact.

BTW the 1951 Refugee Convention nor the 1967 Protocol mentioned "descendant". Only the UNWRA does, because it is needed to help those too.


Quote:
The land "belonged" to the Palestinians, a fact recognised by the Hussein McMahon agreement. Neither the Turks nor the Brits owned it, a fact that you got wrong last time we went through all this and you admitted it. It was "occupied" by the Turks and "Adminstered" by the Brits on behalf of the Palestinian people. They never ever owned it.
The The Hussein-McMahon Correspondence does not contain the word "Palestinian" nor "Palestine".
"Local population" is only used with regard to the vilayets of Bagdad and Basra.
"Natives" is only used 3 times with regard to supplying grain.
The word "immigrant" is not used.
FACT: The Hussein-McMahon Correspondence does not say the land belongs to the Palestinians.

The Turks nor the British administered the land on behalf of the Palestinians. Again this is an invention from you. During the Ottoman Empire the people living in what we now call Israel and the PA was part of the province Syria. That's why your so called Palestinians called themselves Syrians untill Arafat told them to call themselves otherwise.
About the British. The mandate says :"The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate."

Quote:
I fully realise that you are just trying on the old Hasbara Troll ploy of endless repetition of previously disproven points, so unless you start coming up with some facts I'm going to stop answering. Virtually all that you have said has been shown to be wrong at least once before. By facts, I mean facts as recognised by the International community, not Zionist "facts".
You change fact with fiction. You have not proved anything because all you give are your or someone else's opinions. Opinions are not facts.
April 8th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
Even in a tranquil state of future affairs, the evolution of the next generation of monetary systems in regard to world reserve currency after the looming collapse of the dollar and deglobilisation of world economies due to exploding fossil fuel prices. Will rewrite geopolitical interest in this region of the world from the current card holders.

What I am saying, is that these future world issues will pert-rude into this ongoing struggle between Israel and Palestine in a fashion of the reallocation of Middle Eastern Affairs back to being primarily dictated by Middle Eastern Nations.

Western support and influence in the region will evaporate when the complex network of political statesmanship designed to secure continued access to cheap fuels from the region is no longer applicable due to the inability for unlimited growth economies now plaguing the West and the entire globe to afford the more expensive Energy Return to Energy Invested ratio of drilling the "crappy" stuff out of this region anymore.

These problems will lead to reverse foreign aid and interest in supporting Israel to largely landing them on their own in a back yard of enemies. Without direct foreign interests of keeping Israel heavily armed as a base of operations throughout the Middle East to secure economic avenues of fossil fuels at cheap prices critical to our mass consumerist societies. Which wane the ability for the West to become involved, let alone interested in foreign affairs amidst sudden domestic energy shock and deindustrialization. This will place Israel back on an almost even playing field with it's neighbors.

Where this future lands Palestine, may be much different in our currently assumed future for the fledgling Palestinian state and their struggle.

IN SHORT: The world will be in it's own calamity to care as much as squander remaining resources in an cheap energy starved climate to continue the bolstering of Israel, on the same token even on protecting what's left of Palestine. Regional powers in the Middle East will once again assume dominance of the region free of outside influence to decide what kind of climate Israeli actions will be met with.

And if current affairs are any indication, when this global network of foreign policy being the catalyst of securing in one fashion or another cheap economic resources slows down after the implosion of Global Economies bases solely on cheap energy. Israeli intentions whether they feel threatened or not with Palestine will also be less scrutinized, and maybe we haven't seen nothing yet.
You forgot some important facts: Israel will become within a couple of years an energy exporting country. Europe will be very glad to do business with Israel because it is a reliable partner, what cannot be said from Russia. Europe also gets more and more problems with local fanatic muslims which will have a negative impact for the Arab countries. Also more and more countries are investigating their fanancial support to the Palestinians after the revelation that some of that money was used to pay terrorists living in Israeli prisons.
April 8th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Well, that origin is in southern Africa for all of us. Does that mean that that place is our homeland?
You can't pick at which time to claim a place was your homeland? That's exactly what you do!
Rubbish,... I have NEVER stated that anyplace was my "homeland" in fact I have gone to great lengths to show that I don't have a "home land" in the sense you are talking about, when I said such things as (I can't claim places in England, Holland or Eastern Europe etc.).

The term "homeland" is totally meaningless in respect to where some of your ancestors may have lived at some time. If anything, your homeland is that place where you live legally at this time, or if you choose, your place of birth. You could claim yours is Spain unless of course you are still a Belgian subject.

Every one of these replies has been covered in depth and disproven by both myself and others, most of it more than once.
 


Similar Topics
Israel rightfully own the West Bank .
Israel strikes Beirut suburb, tightens blockade
A conversation with Iranian dissident (MUST READ)
Palestinians
American racism