Palestine: Nothing but a con job?

a reply to: tinymind


From the Wikipedia version of Sykes-Picot, the Russians were kept informed and basically rubber-stamped the agreement.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This whole situation comes from Arabs not wanting jews living next to them.
They tried to remove Israel with soldiers twice and failed so they turned to a political attempt.

Not just Jews but Christians too. Everybody rants on about Palestine but what about all the Jewish and Christian communities in north africa and the middle east now empty of Christians and Jews. It's totally nuts and a history never told in the english speaking world. At least in Israel there is a barrier. Where are all the Christians and Jews in Constantine or Oran these day? Dead / ethnically cleansed is the answer, same as in all the other ancient communities around that region where Islam has swept everyone out.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This whole situation comes from Arabs not wanting jews living next to them.
They tried to remove Israel with soldiers twice and failed so they turned to a political attempt.

To be fair that's not really accurate. Syrians are mostly Semitic people descended from Phoenecians and Arameans with leaser numbers of Arabs, Turks, Kurds and Armenians. A lot of them do refer to themselves as Arabs as a result of 7th century Arabisation and Islamization but genetically, the vast majority are Y haplogroup J which has a west Asian, Neolithic origin. I know I'm getting way deeper on this than necessary but you are correct in that there are a large number of muslims who don't want the Jews anywhere near them despite the fact that without the Abrahamic origins and copious "borrowing" of Jewish and Christian theology, Islam wouldn't exist. Sorry for the overly pedantic history lesson.

I am not sure if paying attention to the shell games being played is going to help us clear the air on the Holy Lands

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I am not sure if paying attention to the shell games being played is going to help us clear the air on the Holy Lands

At the very least, it can't make things any worse. Besides, I prefer to think of it as turning over one of the shells long untouched. perhaps even removing one....

Then again, some might be made to feel a bit uncomfortable by this train of thought.......

Maybe this should be in a thread of it's own but this thread made me think of how to solve the land ownership issues. Here is an idea and I'm being serious.

Israel is about 8K square miles in landmass. That's rather small. I suggest we make a deal with Mexico to take their population in Baja California and relocate them to the USA with automatic citizenship. Mexico then grants that land to Isreal. The UN funds the relocation of Israelis from the middle east to the pacific coast to create a new sovereign nation "New Israel". The Palestinians get the "old" Israel. New Israel gets a desert, a coast line and a northern border with the USA. The Palestinians get their land back to make a mess of anyway they wish. Everyone lives happily ever after.

The Baja Peninsula has a population of ~3.5m people - we can absorb that (after Trumps wall goes up). Baja has a land mass over 55K square miles. That should keep the Israelis busy for many generations to come.

What's the downside?

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Israelis already had a choice to stay in Europe move to the US or move to the USSR. They Chose to move to Israel after the British mandate for Palestine. They are there because they want to live there. Why would we take land from MExico to give to people who chose to keep to themselves rather than assimilate? That would be like taking Michigan for the Nepalese.

originally posted by: nemonimity
a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

Israelis already had a choice to stay in Europe move to the US or move to the USSR. They Chose to move to Israel after the British mandate for Palestine. They are there because they want to live there. Why would we take land from MExico to give to people who chose to keep to themselves rather than assimilate? That would be like taking Michigan for the Nepalese.

I'm not suggesting we "take" it from Mexico, we make a deal for it. Another way would be to carve out a bit of Texas west of San Antonio. But, that'll just piss of the Texans.

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti
Maybe this should be in a thread of it's own but this thread made me think of how to solve the land ownership issues. Here is an idea and I'm being serious.

Israel is about 8K square miles in landmass. That's rather small. I suggest we make a deal with Mexico to take their population in Baja California and relocate them to the USA with automatic citizenship. Mexico then grants that land to Isreal. The UN funds the relocation of Israelis from the middle east to the pacific coast to create a new sovereign nation "New Israel". The Palestinians get the "old" Israel. New Israel gets a desert, a coast line and a northern border with the USA. The Palestinians get their land back to make a mess of anyway they wish. Everyone lives happily ever after.

The Baja Peninsula has a population of ~3.5m people - we can absorb that (after Trumps wall goes up). Baja has a land mass over 55K square miles. That should keep the Israelis busy for many generations to come.

What's the downside?

Israel invades the U.S.?

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Israel invades the U.S.?

Hmmm... in that case, maybe Iran will come to our rescue

Well, if Israel really wanted Palestine to exist, they are doing a bad job of it... From progressively settling their land (illegally often) from inception to present as well as bombing to hell the Palestinians...

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti
Maybe this should be in a thread of it's own but this thread made me think of how to solve the land ownership issues. Here is an idea and I'm being serious.

Israel is about 8K square miles in landmass. That's rather small. I suggest we make a deal with Mexico to take their population in Baja California and relocate them to the USA with automatic citizenship. Mexico then grants that land to Isreal. The UN funds the relocation of Israelis from the middle east to the pacific coast to create a new sovereign nation "New Israel". The Palestinians get the "old" Israel. New Israel gets a desert, a coast line and a northern border with the USA. The Palestinians get their land back to make a mess of anyway they wish. Everyone lives happily ever after.

The Baja Peninsula has a population of ~3.5m people - we can absorb that (after Trumps wall goes up). Baja has a land mass over 55K square miles. That should keep the Israelis busy for many generations to come.

What's the downside?

Will never happen due to religion and the ethnic identity with old Israel.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This whole situation comes from Arabs not wanting jews living next to them.
They tried to remove Israel with soldiers twice and failed so they turned to a political attempt.

No. Israel was artificially plunked down by the British and Europeans. This created the conflict. Jews don't have a right to the land just because of an ancient text. Even their own Torah says that they were not indigenous to the land but invaded it and ethnically cleansed it (yes, they committed genocide). Moreover, the Israelis have been progressively eating up Palestinian land since the 40's. It's factual. It's mapped. I'm not advocating the end of Israel, but just providing some actual critical rationale feedback.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This whole situation comes from Arabs not wanting jews living next to them.
They tried to remove Israel with soldiers twice and failed so they turned to a political attempt.

No. Israel was artificially plunked down by the British and Europeans. This created the conflict. Jews don't have a right to the land just because of an ancient text. Even their own Torah says that they were not indigenous to the land but invaded it and ethnically cleansed it (yes, they committed genocide). Moreover, the Israelis have been progressively eating up Palestinian land since the 40's. It's factual. It's mapped. I'm not advocating the end of Israel, but just providing some actual critical rationale feedback.

Apparently, you ignore the whole point of the thread. It's likely you didn't even bother reading it or subsequent links that back up BOTH European intentions AND current neighboring nations intentions. None of which support a new nation in the goal of forming a Levant.

Your posts indicate the standard line, albeit with some truths, and ignore very important truths, as well.

Google Levant, read it, then opine.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This whole situation comes from Arabs not wanting jews living next to them.
They tried to remove Israel with soldiers twice and failed so they turned to a political attempt.

This whole situation comes from Arabs not wanting Jews, Christens, Hindu, Buddhist or any other religion other than their version of Islam living next to them.

There kinda fixed it for you

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

That is correct. See:

www.nkusa.org...

www.nkusa.org...

www.truetorahjews.org...


Shalom

originally posted by: tinymind

originally posted by: JIMC5499
Palestine is a construct of the Arab Nations and the old USSR. It used the Holocaust to lay a guilt trip on the Western Nations in the hope of splitting their forces in the event of a war in Western Europe.

I don't know about any "construct" between the Arab nations and the old USSR ; but if you would care to look at the link below, you will find the oldest mapped reference which I can provide for the name of a land called Palestine. (750 BC - 625 BC) Notice it seems to show the area along the coast as such and a land locked area to the east called Judah. For many years I had heard people say that all the Jews wanted was a return to their original home land. My question is, "Why are they settled along the coast if they originated in the hills and mountains ? This coastal area should be rightfully Palestinian.

www.lib.utexas.edu...

Palestine was Illegally renamed such by the ROMANS in the past. In todays terms it would be a war crime to try and eliminate or rename a people against their will.

Yassre arafatt and PLO leadership have both stated the "palestinians" up till the newest generation were refugees from surrounding arab nations they tossed out on their arses for trying to overthrow them. And all the arabs agree on trying to beat Israel this way because they cant win militarily.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: nwtrucker

The Israeli lobby is powerful in fact all US federal politicians pledge allegiance to it but the simple fact is Washington tolerates them and their macinations for the moment, be under no illusion however Washington is the top dog and if its 'deep state' no longer wishes for Israel to exist then that would be more or less its death warrant,whatever the end plan in the middle east is Washington will be involved......and the Vatican,but thats another story.

I agree re the top dog. As far as Israel goes, they're well past the point anyone can stop them if they have the mind to move.

The reality, in my mind, is if Israel goes down, the whole region, at least, goes down. Israel isn't going anywhere. Deep state, or not.

Yes, in several places in Scripture the wings of a great eagle now separate from the four head beast

And the others line up on Israel but the Eagle is protecting Israel all the way through .

Palestinian agreement is dead ahead

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This whole situation comes from Arabs not wanting jews living next to them.
They tried to remove Israel with soldiers twice and failed so they turned to a political attempt.

Not just Jews but Christians too. Everybody rants on about Palestine but what about all the Jewish and Christian communities in north africa and the middle east now empty of Christians and Jews. It's totally nuts and a history never told in the english speaking world. At least in Israel there is a barrier. Where are all the Christians and Jews in Constantine or Oran these day? Dead / ethnically cleansed is the answer, same as in all the other ancient communities around that region where Islam has swept everyone out.

The fact that Jews, Christians and Muslims lived side by side across the middle east and north africa for over a thousand years seems to be ignored by you.

The jewish depopulation of the middle east, north africa and central asia happened in response to the creation of Israel by western zionists and the wars that went along with this theft of land and imposition of an apartheid state. This happened less than a hundred years ago after more than ten times as long spent living in a multi cultural region.

The christian depopulation of the middle east, north africa and central asia didn't even happen. There are still many Christians living in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Iran, for example. Obviously, the number is far less than it used to be before Israel and other contributory factors led to increased migration.

Have you noted that all of these religions sharing the same spaces for over a millenium happened despite the whole region being under Muslim rulers for all of this time?

Even a cursory knowledge of the history of this area would have been useful before trotting out your NWO-fed Islamophobic ignorance. Try opening a book.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This whole situation comes from Arabs not wanting jews living next to them.
They tried to remove Israel with soldiers twice and failed so they turned to a political attempt.

No. Israel was artificially plunked down by the British and Europeans. This created the conflict. Jews don't have a right to the land just because of an ancient text. Even their own Torah says that they were not indigenous to the land but invaded it and ethnically cleansed it (yes, they committed genocide). Moreover, the Israelis have been progressively eating up Palestinian land since the 40's. It's factual. It's mapped. I'm not advocating the end of Israel, but just providing some actual critical rationale feedback.

You make the important point that 'followers of the torah' were never indigenous to the so-called land of Israel. But the idea of anyone being indigenous to anywhere is silly as human history is defined by migration. Nevertheless it has been successfully used to justify land appropriation across the world.

I would also say that arguing against the zionist idea that the land belongs to Jews gives credence to the idea of 'Jews'. The genetic historian who described 'Syrians' above could no doubt expound on the divergence of the groups of Hebrews who initially formed what is now known as Judaism. Of course, even his description of the situation was simplistic regarding the idea that Kurds, Arabs etc. don't have various populations with different haplogroup clusters and so on. Anyway, many, if not most, of the 'Jews' in the world appear to not even have semitic ancestry. 'Jews' have not only not preserved an ancient line of heritage from any specific tribes of Hebrews but generally never were Hebrews in the first place. In fact, when you consider that many Arab Muslims are more closely related to some groups of semitic jews who never left the middle east perhaps it makes clear just how ridiculous this whole charade is.

I must confess though, the powers that be use it so well to enhance their agenda.