So why do people hate Israel? - Page 63




 
--
 
May 9th, 2012  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
The Jordanians haven't forgotten september 1970 when the PLO wanted more say in Jordan. The result was that the PLO was kicked out of Jordan and fled to Libanon where they had to flee again because of the Israeli invasion because of the terrorist attacks. The PLO fled to Tunesia.
Even today Palestinians are not welcome in Jordan. 100.000 Syrian refugees are in Jordan, but 1.000 Palestinians were not allowed to enter.
As usual when you have no answer, you argument is drifting. This is debate is about Israel not Jordan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
There are only two places where Palestinians are tolerated. The Palestinian Territories and Israel. In other countries most of them live in refugee camps.
all because israel has evicted then from their own land.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
which Arafat agreed. The duress is because they have to, not because they wish to.
Duress is when you have no alternative due to outside pressure, the fact that the pressure is improper and immoral is what counts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
True, but they didn't steal it, they bought it. Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco did after Israel was declared a state in 1948.
Bullsh!t...

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
It is time that you learn the difference between an invasion (Arab invasions of Israel - multiple times) and legal immigration in the Ottoman Empire and British Mandate.
It is time that you learn the difference between an invasion and legal immigration. The Palestinians can't "invade" their own country. They are merely trying to regain it. The Brits tried for years to stop illegal Jewish immigration into Palestine.
May 10th, 2012  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
As usual when you have no answer, you argument is drifting. This is debate is about Israel not Jordan.
Look who's talking.

Quote:
all because israel has evicted then from their own land.
they were ordered to flee by their "fellow" Arab Palestinians because they were going to teach the jews some lessons and drive them into the sea.

Quote:
Duress is when you have no alternative due to outside pressure, the fact that the pressure is improper and immoral is what counts.
and the outside pressure is.....terrorist attacks. Israel has been able to reduce terrorist attacks to a minimum. Their strategy works. The IDF, as any defense force, is responsible for the safety of their civilians. and they are very good at that.

Quote:
Bullsh!t...
May 16, 1948, The New York Times



Quote:
It is time that you learn the difference between an invasion and legal immigration. The Palestinians can't "invade" their own country. They are merely trying to regain it. The Brits tried for years to stop illegal Jewish immigration into Palestine.
There was Jewish and Arab illegal immigration. Most Jews came legally.
So, according to you the Palestinians had their own country. I'm missing some history here. Please give me the name of that country, did it have a President, King, Prime minister or cleric. If so, what was his name? What was the capital of that country?
On the other hand there was a Kingdom of Israel and a state of Israel was founded on 14 May 1948. It is a Parliamentary democracy, their president was Chaim Weizmann (now it is Shimon Peres who won the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize). Prime minister was David Ben-Gurion (now Benjamin Netanyahu). It's capital is Jerusalem.
May 10th, 2012  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Look who's talking.
Yes,... you are.


Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
they were ordered to flee by their "fellow" Arab Palestinians because they were going to teach the jews some lessons and drive them into the sea.
Rightfully so,... they had every right to try after having had their land stolen from them. I would do exactly the same if they tried to take over Australia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
and the outside pressure is.....terrorist attacks. Israel has been able to reduce terrorist attacks to a minimum. Their strategy works. The IDF, as any defense force, is responsible for the safety of their civilians. and they are very good at that.
Yes, the Einsatzgruppen had a similar policy, wiping out whole villages, and the IDF do them great credit. How many Palestinian villages have been wiped of the map, how many Dunnums (Hectares will do), of olive groves have been destroyed, how many other homes have been bulldozed without compensation (in some cases with invalid the occupants still in them) all so the Jews can have new roads and land? And you have the unmitigated gall to talk about "terrorism",... LOL

No the outside pressure was the US bringing pressure onto their "allies" to support their immoral backing of a rogue state, as they have done in several other spectacularly unsuccessful regional disputes, let's see now,... the Diem regime, Pinochet regime, Shah of Iran etc, Saddam Hussein are a few that just come to mind.


Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
May 16, 1948, The New York Times

Typical Jewish panic mongering. I think there's little doubt that far more Muslims have died at the hands of the Jews, than the reverse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
There was Jewish and Arab illegal immigration. Most Jews came legally.
Rubbish! Arabs had lived in the area for Millenia, being nomads there were no borders for them so they couldn't be said to be entering illegally, after all it was and still is their land.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
So, according to you the Palestinians had their own country. I'm missing some history here. Please give me the name of that country, did it have a President, King, Prime minister or cleric. If so, what was his name? What was the capital of that country?
We have gone through this before, Native people need no Kings or Prime ministers etc., that is purely a western concept. Aboriginals had no kings etc., but they still owned the country, a fact that is recognised in International and Australian law. Of course they had their own country. You've obviously missed a lot, nearly everything in fact,... have you forgotten to take your Alzheimer's medication again?
--
May 11th, 2012  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Yes,... you are.


Rightfully so,... they had every right to try after having had their land stolen from them. I would do exactly the same if they tried to take over Australia.
Your logic about Australia and Palestine is contradictory.

The ones who ignored the "advice" (about 160.000) were right. They and their families have a much better life than the ones who left and live in a refugee camp, abandonend by the ones who urged them to flee and totally dependend on foreign aid (UN).

Quote:
Yes, the Einsatzgruppen had a similar policy, wiping out whole villages, and the IDF do them great credit. How many Palestinian villages have been wiped of the map, how many Dunnums (Hectares will do), of olive groves have been destroyed, how many other homes have been bulldozed without compensation (in some cases with invalid the occupants still in them) all so the Jews can have new roads and land? And you have the unmitigated gall to talk about "terrorism",... LOL
I do not dispute that there are or were irregularities but you are grossly exaggerating. If the Arab Palestinians had accepted the partition deal a lot of those villages would still exist. But they choosed to attack and during war properties get destroyed. (look at the destruction of Germany in WWII). You also fail to mention that the Arabs destroyed Jewish towns too.
About those olive groves. Like always you look at the small things and ignore the big picture.
A Successful Olive Harvest Season in Judea and Samaria :
"Palestinians praised the successful coordination during harvest season this year. "The presence of forces greatly helped us complete the harvest without many incidents," said one Palestinian liaison manager in central Judea and Samaria."
Quote:
No the outside pressure was the US bringing pressure onto their "allies" to support their immoral backing of a rogue state, as they have done in several other spectacularly unsuccessful regional disputes, let's see now,... the Diem regime, Pinochet regime, Shah of Iran etc, Saddam Hussein are a few that just come to mind.
Yes, let's see now...
Diem regime : the US got rid of him in November 1 1963 (JFK and the Diem Coup)
Pinochet regime : US support stopped with the arrival of president carter. (the coup of september 1973 was backed by the US because of the chaos of the Salvador Allende years)
Shah of Iran : Eisenhower and Churchill decided to overthrow Iran's government and put the Shah in power. At that time there was a worldwide oil boycot against Iran. The regime of the Shah was very brutal just as the one that is in power now.

Quote:
Typical Jewish panic mongering. I think there's little doubt that far more Muslims have died at the hands of the Jews, than the reverse.
Like in most conflicts, the attackers have the most casualties.
More Jews fled than Palestinians. But the Jews started a new life somewhere else while the Palestinians still live in their refugeecamps living from international (including Israeli) aid.

Quote:
Rubbish! Arabs had lived in the area for Millenia, being nomads there were no borders for them so they couldn't be said to be entering illegally, after all it was and still is their land.
Arabs, like the word says, came from Arabia and not the region of Palestine. Nomads (Bedouins) still live in Israel. The Arab immigration in the region of Palestine was because of the economic opportunities the Jews gave them. Most "Palestinians" were poor farmers working the land for powerfull landlords who lived in Cairo or other big Arab cities. Your notion of "their" land is totally wrong.

Quote:
We have gone through this before, Native people need no Kings or Prime ministers etc., that is purely a western concept. Aboriginals had no kings etc., but they still owned the country, a fact that is recognised in International and Australian law. Of course they had their own country. You've obviously missed a lot, nearly everything in fact,... have you forgotten to take your Alzheimer's medication again?
Every society has its leaders, otherwise it is just a bunch of individuals who do what they please. The Aboriginals had no kings or presidents but elders. They didn't own the land, they lived their. In aboriginal society their was no such thing as property ownership. In the region of Palestine their was property ownership. It was registered on file by the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century. Only with a document of ownership you could say the property was yours. Without that document you just lived there (on someone else's land).
May 11th, 2012  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Your logic about Australia and Palestine is contradictory.
Only to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
The ones who ignored the "advice" (about 160.000) were right. They and their families have a much better life than the ones who left and live in a refugee camp, abandonend by the ones who urged them to flee and totally dependend on foreign aid (UN).
Yes, and you totally forget who it is that will not allow them to return to their land. (without having to sign it away).

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
I do not dispute that there are or were irregularities but you are grossly exaggerating. If the Arab Palestinians had accepted the partition deal a lot of those villages would still exist.
A Successful Olive Harvest Season in Judea and Samaria :
"Palestinians praised the successful coordination during harvest season this year. "The presence of forces greatly helped us complete the harvest without many incidents," said one Palestinian liaison manager in central Judea and Samaria."
No I'm not exaggerating and you are well aware of that fact. you also know that the Palestinians had no more reason to accept a partition than you have to sign all your worldly goods and possessions over to me.

The fact that an olive harvest was successful, in no way exonerates the Israelis for the theft of the land and demolition of olive groves. It was only successful for the remaining olives. You are obviously an idiot of the first order.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Yes, let's see now...
Diem regime : the US got rid of him in November 1 1963 (JFK and the Diem Coup)
Pinochet regime : US support stopped with the arrival of president carter. (the coup of september 1973 was backed by the US because of the chaos of the Salvador Allende years)
Shah of Iran : Eisenhower and Churchill decided to overthrow Iran's government and put the Shah in power. At that time there was a worldwide oil boycot against Iran. The regime of the Shah was very brutal just as the one that is in power now.
Yes and no doubt when they are finally forced into admitting that Israel is a rogue state they will help get rid of them too. The US supported all of these whilst under the control of dictatorial regimes. My point being that US support is no guarantee of a legitimate regime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Like in most conflicts, the attackers have the most casualties.
More Jews fled than Palestinians. But the Jews started a new life somewhere else while the Palestinians still live in their refugeecamps living from international (including Israeli) aid.
Your statement like your logic is contradictory, as it was the Israelis who pushed the Palestinans out of their land, not the reverse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Arabs, like the word says, came from Arabia and not the region of Palestine. Nomads (Bedouins) still live in Israel. The Arab immigration in the region of Palestine was because of the economic opportunities the Jews gave them. Most "Palestinians" were poor farmers working the land for powerfull landlords who lived in Cairo or other big Arab cities. Your notion of "their" land is totally wrong.
You've forgotten your medication again haven't you as this has been answered? The Palestinians are the recognised descendants of the original occupants. The fact that Arabs are intermixed does not lessen this claim. your memory is atrocious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Every society has its leaders, otherwise it is just a bunch of individuals who do what they please. The Aboriginals had no kings or presidents but elders. They didn't own the land, they lived their. In aboriginal society their was no such thing as property ownership. In the region of Palestine their was property ownership. It was registered on file by the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century. Only with a document of ownership you could say the property was yours. Without that document you just lived there (on someone else's land).
WRONG! The Aboriginals as a group owned the land, a fact that is written in law and recognised internationally. After all it was largely international pressure that bought this recognition about.
May 12th, 2012  
RayManKiller3
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips

WRONG! The Aboriginals as a group owned the land, a fact that is written in law and recognised internationally. After all it was largely international pressure that bought this recognition about.
I think you completely missed his point. While the Aboriginals "owned" the land, they didn't "own" it the way western and middle-eastern countries owned land. We used government to determine who owned what by purchasing or handing it down.

The Aboriginals didn't have a form of government and was completely isolated from other civilization. Making it a complete different case than the Palestinians. The Aboriginal's genetics is easily traceable due to being on an "island" (technically Australia isn't an island lol). Whereas, so many cultures and people crossed by the Palestinian region.

Not all Arab Palestinians were naturally Arab Palestinians, either, as they immigrated from other countries as well.

I can understand why Israel refuses to grant permission to the refugees that had fled or been kicked out of Israel. Many Arabs immigrated or snuck into Israel just to do terrorist attacks, why would they want to increase the risk by allowing their country to be flooded with potential Jihadist? It is obviously national security keep in mind. Then there is the impact of demographically overwhelming the 6 million Jews, this can change how things go politically and economically for the country. I can see why they worry about that personally, because we have a somewhat similar concern in U.S with illegals.

I don't think most people would agree with using the Aboriginals or South Africa as an example of solutions. Not to mention, VDKMS is correct in that most legally immigrated. So then, how do we transition land from these legal Jews correctly to Palestinian Arabs?

This is no doubt a racial/religious strife we see, under the guise of land owndership. I don't see your solution happening, Seno. It is no doubt that most are looking for a 2 state solution. I just want all sides to cooperate so we can get this done.
May 12th, 2012  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayManKiller3
I think you completely missed his point. While the Aboriginals "owned" the land, they didn't "own" it the way western and middle-eastern countries owned land. We used government to determine who owned what by purchasing or handing it down.
I'm starting to think I'm actually losing it somewhere, by bothering to answer you. As I remember I put you on ignore for this kind of stupidity last time you started. You must drive your poor bloody bosses right up the wall.

Before you made that stupid statement, did you stop to think for just one second, that firstly, neither the Aboriginals nor the Palestinians were or are "Westerners", and secondly that the "ownership" I was refering to is now recognised by both Australian and International "Western" conventions?

FFS,... Either go back to sleep, or at least try to follow the debate,... with people like you around it's very easy to see why the world is so fcuked up.
May 12th, 2012  
RayManKiller3
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
I'm starting to think I'm actually losing it somewhere, by bothering to answer you. As I remember I put you on ignore for this kind of stupidity last time you started. You must drive your poor bloody bosses right up the wall.

Before you made that stupid statement, did you stop to think for just one second, that firstly, neither the Aboriginals nor the Palestinians were or are "Westerners", and secondly that the "ownership" I was refering to is now recognised by both Australian and International "Western" conventions?

FFS,... Either go back to sleep, or at least try to follow the debate,... with people like you around it's very easy to see why the world is so fcuked up.
This is what happens when you fail to read.

I said Aboriginals didn't own land the way western and Middle-east did. Palestinians are not westerners, true, but they did have government and did have to register their lands. Most Arab land ownership was not registered with the Ottoman Empire. Most Jewish land ownership was registered (there was illegal buying and selling though) . Most Jews immigrated to Palestine legally.

We buy and trade land and so did Palestinians (under whatever government they had at the time) and you had a written document to prove your ownership. This is the way our governments worked.

I am merely pointing out that the case of Aboriginals and Palestians are completely different. You can not really them to compare to one another.

Aboriginals didn't have a form of government
Aboriginals were completely isolated from other civilizations, because of this, their genetics is easily traceable.

The Aboriginal case is clean cut.

I think this is what VDKMS was to saying.
May 12th, 2012  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Only to you.
No, including me.

Quote:
Yes, and you totally forget who it is that will not allow them to return to their land. (without having to sign it away).
I did not forget. It's Israel and for two reasons.
1 - because the Arabs won't let the Jews back in either.
2 - it happend before :letter from Benjamin Franklin to Richard Oswald November 26 1782: (Memoirs of Benjamin Franklin)
"Your ministers require, that we should receive again into our bosom, those who have been our bitterest enemies, and restore their properties who have destroyed ours, and this while the wounds they have given us are still bleeding ! It is many years since your nation expelled the Stuarts and their adherents, and confiscated their estates. Much of your resentment against them may by this time be abated ; yet if we should propose it, and insist on it as an article of our treaty with you, that that family should be recalled, and the forfeited estates of its friends restored, would you think us serious in our professions of earnestly desiring peace?"
Quote:
No I'm not exaggerating and you are well aware of that fact. you also know that the Palestinians had no more reason to accept a partition than you have to sign all your worldly goods and possessions over to me.

The fact that an olive harvest was successful, in no way exonerates the Israelis for the theft of the land and demolition of olive groves. It was only successful for the remaining olives. You are obviously an idiot of the first order.
Yes you are exaggerating.
They should have accepted. They would have had more land than they will ever have. There would have been peace en no oslo accords would have been needed, so no Israeli IDF forces in some areas of the West bank. No refugees.
No defeat in several conflicts. And I can go on.

Abbas faults Arab refusal of 1947 U.N. Palestine plan:
"Arabs made a "mistake" by rejecting a 1947 U.N. proposal that would have created a Palestinian state alongside the nascent Israel"

There are two reasons for uprooted Olive trees:
1 - illegally planted, they have to be removed.
2 - destroyed by religious fanatic Israelis, a crime.
Both destructions are almost neglectible considering the amount of olive trees in the West Bank. 10 Million olive trees for 100.000 families!

Quote:
Yes and no doubt when they are finally forced into admitting that Israel is a rogue state they will help get rid of them too. The US supported all of these whilst under the control of dictatorial regimes. My point being that US support is no guarantee of a legitimate regime.
Israel is accepted throughout the world (exept Moslim countries). It's the best working democracy in the ME. They will get western support as long as is needed.

Quote:
Your statement like your logic is contradictory, as it was the Israelis who pushed the Palestinans out of their land, not the reverse.
Again you skip a timeline. They fled because of the Arab attacks. The Arabs themselves caused it.

A collection of historical quotations relating to the Arab refugees
IN THE MARCH 1976 issue of Falastin a-Thaura, then the official journal of the Beirut-based PLO, Mahmud Abbas ("Abu Mazen"), PLO spokesman, wrote: "The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live."
Quote:
You've forgotten your medication again haven't you as this has been answered? The Palestinians are the recognised descendants of the original occupants. The fact that Arabs are intermixed does not lessen this claim. your memory is atrocious.
The Palestinians are not recognised as the original occupants, the people who lived there are, including Jews and Christians. The "Palestinians" only exists for about a century.

Mahmoud Abbas

"even the churches were not spared. One of the oldest churches in Palestine, which stood long before our arrival"

Synagogues were build before the churches....

"Palestine's Rural Economy, 1917 - 1939"
"During the early decades of the twentieth century in Palestine, the majority Arab population sustained itself primarily through agricultural and pastoral pursuits. The land and its management dominated the peasant's life. Palestinian fellaheen precariously but diligently existed in degrees of subsistence and poverty. The annual struggle to survive required rugged persistence. It necessitated an almost fatalistic acceptance of repeated destitution and regular financial insolvency. The rural economy's nature prevented the peasant from enjoying economic or political independence."
Quote:
WRONG! The Aboriginals as a group owned the land, a fact that is written in law and recognised internationally. After all it was largely international pressure that bought this recognition about.
Where are the borders of their land and who drew them? The Aboriginals were given property rights in the Native Title Act of 1993. If you "own" the land why is it that someone else gives you property rights?
May 12th, 2012  
Yossarian
 
 
My obersavations thus far.

Around a good 43% of comments at this point ( page 63 I believe?) Is about what the prior post is doing to upset the replying poster.

Around 11 % is pure spite insinged with news articles from sources so broad and varied that there is no hope of any of it having a consistant opinion.

Another 9 % is attacks at poor word choice , along with improper usage or ignorace at basic grammer rules, as if this can further one's opinions over the adversary somehow.

And about 25 % Is more or less constant re explanations of re used materials coupled with re used rebuttles to said materials. Sort of a endless matrix of wording if you will.

And 10 % is photo's of supporting material for attacks of opinion or rebuttles to said attacks.

And about 2 % at this junction seems to actually be truely about Israel/ Palestine.

Either this a endless debate about a serious topic, or I am in a room full of journalists.
 


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