Palestinian Incitement Resembling Nazi Germany

Just received this in my email. It is veru troubling since it is historically wrong and hate mongering propaganda remencient of Nazi German propaganda. See this link: switch5.castup.net...

I would like to know from the Arabs on this forum if the translation is accurate and then get some responses. Note this is Palestinian TV. Can there be peace in this situation?

JM

I didn't see any nods of agreement from any of the persons listening to him so we can probably assume that they did not agree with him and he is probably just some nut that no one cares about.

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
I would like to know from the Arabs on this forum if the translation is accurate and then get some responses. Note this is Palestinian TV. Can there be peace in this situation?

Why should there be peace ? I mean, arent the israelis living on illegally occupied palestinian land ?

Nice find.

Is what he said about Britain and France true? That they "cleansed" themselves of Jews in their history?

At least he promised that all the non-Jews the Muslims conquer will be treated peacefully

Originally posted by AceOfBase
I didn't see any nods of agreement from any of the persons listening to him so we can probably assume that they did not agree with him and he is probably just some nut that no one cares about.

Keep your head buried in the sand. The fact that it was televised on Palestinian TV is sufficient to show that the Palestinian leadership is at very least not as disagreement with what is said. Remember that the Palestinian authority does not allow freedom of the press or expression.

Originally posted by Moretti

Why should there be peace ? I mean, arent the israelis living on illegally occupied palestinian land ?

Israel is living very legally on Israeli land - see 1947 UN resolution on the creation of the state of Israel.
If you are referring to the West Bank and Gaza. This is Jordanian land which Jordan relinquished in the 80s. Anyhow this is another subject which if you would like I can get into.

Originally posted by Ray Davies
Nice find.

Is what he said about Britain and France true? That they "cleansed" themselves of Jews in their history?

I think he is referring to the time of the Inquisition in the dark ages when the Christians in Europe persecuted the Jews and forced them to convert or die.

At least he promised that all the non-Jews the Muslims conquer will be treated peacefully

What do you think OBL or his cohorts would say?

Originally posted by Ray Davies

Is what he said about Britain and France true? That they "cleansed" themselves of Jews in their history?

Yep, they kicked them out because the "Jews" were buying up land and spreading hate against the Crown and Society as it was then. Back prior to the 17th Century, the actions of the Jewish people got them banned from working as anything but a banker or a philosopher/writer.

One thing I notice is the fact he talks about Nazism being "provoked and funded" by the Jews. If you look into it Irgun actually had secret meetings with the Nazi Government against Britain and leading Jewish Family's helped fund Hitler and the Reich.

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi

Originally posted by Moretti

Why should there be peace ? I mean, arent the israelis living on illegally occupied palestinian land ?

Israel is living very legally on Israeli land - see 1947 UN resolution on the creation of the state of Israel.
If you are referring to the West Bank and Gaza. This is Jordanian land which Jordan relinquished in the 80s. Anyhow this is another subject which if you would like I can get into.

Article 181, 29th of November 1947 states no one Nation should control Jerusalem nor should they have an armed presence in it.

They are breaking the U.N. Resolution.

Quick Note:

By fall of their land and control by Muslims, he talks about Revelations/Apocalypse. With both christians, jews and muslims thinking God will give them the land once the end times come. It's in most of the Holy Books/texts.

Originally posted by Odium

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi

Originally posted by Moretti

Why should there be peace ? I mean, arent the israelis living on illegally occupied palestinian land ?

Israel is living very legally on Israeli land - see 1947 UN resolution on the creation of the state of Israel.
If you are referring to the West Bank and Gaza. This is Jordanian land which Jordan relinquished in the 80s. Anyhow this is another subject which if you would like I can get into.

Article 181, 29th of November 1947 states no one Nation should control Jerusalem nor should they have an armed presence in it.

They are breaking the U.N. Resolution.

Thankyou for posting this.

Whether or not we Westerners like to admit it, we're effectively supporting the illegal occupation of a land which was at best unfairly parceled out by parties who, though the motivation might have been admirable, did not understand nor try to understand the huge cultural and social discrepancies created by their decisions.

Links which may provide further insight - and will of course be judged "biased" and "unfair" be detractors, and "fair" and "accurate" by supporters:
www.guardian.co.uk...
www.war-times.org...
www.twnside.org.sg...
www.informationclearinghouse.info...
www.krysstal.com...

To peruse the original Sykes-Picot agreement relating to land divied out (helpful in understanding reasons why various Middle Eastern peoples resent the West):
www.vlaamspalestinakomitee.be...

What is this? No condemnations from the morally superior forum members of state supported incitement toward the massacre of an entire ethnic group?

Well just to place things in prospective:
Tinkleflower:
Your first link claims are based on left-wing Israeli organizations 'findings'. I think that the true reason for Israels standing today is the OSLO process. Had Israel not gone in that direction but continued in the Madrid Conference's direction (not negotiating with the PLO since it is an outright terrorist organization) Israel would have not been bogged down by the Intifadah, its economic stagnation as a result of it, Palestinian unemployment would have been higher and more Jews and Palestinians would have been alive today.
Your second link is more left-wing babble that neglects Palestinian attrocities and focuses on Israeli counterterror sweeps needed to defend a population who has been targeted for centuries on the basis of their ethnicity. If you want to provide a link that is believeable at least make sure it is balanced. Or maybe you are biased and so that article suites you.
Your third link although more intelligent is flawed in the following manner:
1- The occupied lands he talks about was conquered during a war from Jordan not Palestine. Palestine was never a country. Therefore when he says ". . .preventing them from the exercise of their right to self-determination and the establishment of their State, Palestine." This is not true. The land, if anything, is Jordanian!
2- There is a political battle in the interpretation of the UNs resolutions as he mentioned. Israel is not obligated to withdraw from all territories is captured in a war it was forced to enter.
3- His opening statement "Bringing an end to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land is as much a prerequisite for peace in the Middle East as is the Palestinian recognition of Israel." Cannot be valid - In what negotiation does a party capitulate all his cards at the begining of negotiation? In addition, since when is recognition (something intangible) equivalent in magnitude to full withdrawal to indefendible borders (very tangible)? This notion is asinine!!!
You third link is again one-sided, unbalanced, contains lies and twisted facts. Example: "Nine-tenths of Palestinians killed by the Israelis are civilians". This is an outright lie fact is that around 46% - 75% of the Palestinians killed where combatants (not including stone throwers). In comparison 80% of the Israelis killed where non-combatants. This is obvious since Palestinians target non-combatants by way of strategy.
www.ict.org.il...
In addition claiming that Arabs have been forced off the land in 1948 is a one sided statement since there is ample proof that Palestinians have been asked to leave their homes by the invading Arab armies so that the "Jews can be pushed into the sea".
Your last link I have no idea how this relates to this topic but I do not disagree that Arabs have contributed to various sciences and arts.

Odium:I guess you support that Muslim cleric's rhetoric! Good for you! Take off that mask! by the way provide support for your claims it would assist!

Support? I gave you year, date and number. Simple as that.
What Mask? What are you trying to say this time? Simple fact is, you use biased media, such as www.ict.org.il... you refuse to acknowledge the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli Government. I have quoted U.N. sources, human rights sources, etc to you before and you are blind to what is going on. It's that simple, you are clearly refusing to accept the truth.

Last time we spoke you refused to admit to the meetings between leading Levi and Irgun members with Nazi Germany, even though they themselves admit it.

But then you wish to defend a nation which was founded by people like Theodor Herzl who stated such things as this:

“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews. . . become worse. . . this will assist in realization of our plans. . .I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends”. (From his Diary, Part I, pp. 16)

"So anti-Semitism, which is a deeply imbedded force in the subconscious mind of the masses, will not harm the Jews. I actually find it to be advantageous to building the Jewish character, education by the masses that will lead to assimilation. This education can only happen through suffering, and the Jews will adapt."

“We Jews are aliens… a foreign people in your midst and we… wish to stay that way. A Jew can never be a loyal German; whoever calls the foreign land his Fatherland is a traitor to the Jewish people“. (1921)

"The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis and bound by a treaty with the German Reich would be in the interests of strengthening the future German position of power in the Near East ... The NMO in Palestine offers to take an active part in the war on Germany's side ... The cooperation of the Israeli freedom movement would also be in line with one of the recent speeches of the German Reich Chancellor, in which Herr Hitler stressed that any combination and any alliance would be entered into in order to isolate England and defeat it."

"If I knew it was possible to save all the children in Germany by taking them to England, and only half of the children by taking them to Eretz Israel, I would choose the second solution. For we must take into account not only the lives of these children but also the history of the people of Israel." - oh yes, he didn't mind a few Jews dying in WW2 if it got him his State in Israel.

Another Pro-Isreai Propaganda post by Judah.

Hey Judah did you take your nick from first part of Judah Priest?

By the way - the illegal occupation of Palestine wont end, as long as the USA is supporting Isreal with Economic, Military and Diplomatic Aid.

But I understand the Pain and Suffering of Isreli people, who just want one thing - to have Entire Jeruesalem for themselves and to finnaly drive the Palestinian refugees into the sea in Gaza Strip.

Too bad they wont ever make it.

I guess that Solomon Temple will have to wait a little more to be built.

Does that make you Angry?

Why didnt you post any reply in my thread, where Isreali soldiers admited they Enjoyed killing Palestinian Police?

Why didnt you protect your fellow Soldiers?







[edit on 6/6/05 by Souljah]

Ok, is there anyone who doesn't resemble Nazis these days?

I mean, we got palestinians are nazis threads, we got Israel is nazi-like, we got EU is nazi, we got USA is like Nazi Germany...

Seems like every time you want to bash a nation, just compare them to nazis, that should do the trick.
Then if someone oposes your theory call him a nazi supporter.

Man...

Oh btw, since Israel was destroyed 2000 years ago, and created again only 50 years ago, was that piece of land called "no name" in between? For centuries something existed there.
I mean, there must have been a name attached to it. It was a british colony before the creation of Israel, what was the name of it on the maps?
I think it was called Palestine or something...

Originally posted by paperclip
Ok, is there anyone who doesn't resemble Nazis these days?

I mean, we got palestinians are nazis threads, we got Israel is nazi-like, we got EU is nazi, we got USA is like Nazi Germany...

Seems like every time you want to bash a nation, just compare them to nazis, that should do the trick.
Then if someone oposes your theory call him a nazi supporter.

Man...

Oh btw, since Israel was destroyed 2000 years ago, and created again only 50 years ago, was that piece of land called "no name" in between? For centuries something existed there.
I mean, there must have been a name attached to it. It was a british colony before the creation of Israel, what was the name of it on the maps?
I think it was called Palestine or something...

...No the land always belonged to the Jews, we've not stolen anything. -waves hands in front of your face-

The fun thing about sources is very simply explained.

If the source in question disagrees with your point - it's biased and unfair.
If the source agrees - then it's objective and nonbiased.

I think we're all able to see the trend; it's only natural that citing a source inevitably leads the poster open to criticism (which can be great!) and/or misguided slurs (which are sadly more common).

Let's face it - most of us are biased about certain topics. I've never disputed this, and it's not likely that you'll see anyone do so here.

Having said that, some sources are more objective than others. Allow me to go and find some that'll appease the detractors a little more than those I used.

(paperclip? I laughed there....yes, it's obvious that everyone is a Nazi if we don't agree with someone else's post. I've learned this very quickly in my couple of weeks reading these and other online forums. )

It resembles Nazi Germany....only without Hitler, and with far fewer and less sophisticated weapons. The Palestinians aren't any sort of a threat to the Jews. They're just pawns that the rest of the Arab world use as an excuse to hate the Jews.

The Palestinian Incitement more closely resembles barnacles on the hull of an aircraft carrier. They're a bit of a nuisance but they don't do any real damage. Israelis just have to pause and clean them off every now and then.

I don't think it's quite fair to call this a piece of pro-Israel propoganda.

We've certainly had plenty of threads posted from the other perspective, and in that sense when both sides are partaking in bashing both sides also lose the right to criticize the other for doing it.

If one side's propoganda is posted, the other side is entitled to theirs as well. This is a pretty fair and even handed forum.

On another note, I and many others are really getting tired of this Nazi crap.

Bush is a Nazi, Israel is Nazis, Palestinians are Nazis, blah blah blah.

Can people please find a different way to express their displeasure with someone than this? It's become painfully redundant and frankly, asinine.

I'm not talking about any specific examples because I wouldn't want to upset anyone of course, but as a general trend... it's getting out of hand lately.

Odium, I will try to get back to you on your posts later.
It is midnight here in 'Occupied Palestine'. I need to kill a gentile and prepare holiday pastries from his blood since we are holding an Elders of Zion meeting to determine how to control the world. So as you see I am quite busy.

Tinkleflower
I would like to see articles that do not say those bad Israelis did this and that while negcting to mention the plethora of 'things' the palestinians have done. A balanced article would say, for example, that while a pregnant Palestinian woman is forced to wait at a check-point it would also say why that checkpoint is necessary? why would thoroughly checking ambulances be necessary? Why are closures necessary? In other words put the events in it proper 'light'.

Souljah

May the force be with you. Just because some triggerhappy Israeli soldier expressed his enjoyment in shooting Palestinian soldiers does not mean that everyone is like that. Incidentally - Why is it OK to shoot Israeli soldiers in their sleep (as occured with the Palestinians who shot the Israeli soldier and as a result Sharon, supposedly, ordered this attack) and it is not OK to kill Palestinian policemen in a checkpoint?
Why is it always that the attrocities of the Palestinians are absolved while Israeli attrocities become outrages? The world has gotten used to Palestinian outrages and a higher morale conduct is expected out of Israel?

As a final word for today:

No-one mentioned anything about the original post. Almost everyone immediately jumped off into Israel-Bashing. Fact is that Palestinian TV airs religious speeches by a Muslim Imam (who ironically has an uncanny resemblance to my wifes cousin) who preaches hate, murder and genocide to his congregation and bases himself on historic inaccuracies. Is this suitable in a backdrop of possible peace negotiations?

[edit on 6/6/05 by JudahMaccabbi]