POLITICS: Palestinian PM Steps Down- Gives Job to Hamas

IAF, do not try to debate by throwing insults around.

The man has not called for the muder of Jewish people, you are instead of creating a logical debate attempting to bring it down to race. Which seems to be the case on these forums more and more. If you can't debate a political ideology, without mentioning one race or another than you really are not denying ignorance.

In fact, it is a joke - like many peoples actions on here. I'll remember to call anyone Anti-British, because they dislike New Labour? Or Anti-American because they dislike the Republican Party? Sorry, world doesn't work like that.

You are a *good bloke*. I have never even implied that I am anti-semtic because I am not. I have no hatred for the Jews or any especial love for the Arabs. I do not support violence period. All I am saying is that both sides have blood on their hands, and whether you like it or accept it or not, living on the land for generations conveys a valid claim to it. How many times do I have to say it? I know damned good and well that there were Jews living in Palestine during the Crusades. There were Christians as well. The Beduin were semi nomadic tribesmen but there were also city dwellers as well and farmers and merchants...all of whom had lived there for centuries and had far more valid claim to the land than the tribesmen.

The name, Palestine doesn't appear in the Bible either. What's your point?

Mod Edit: See my post below please

[edit on 1/29/06 by FredT]

Originally posted by Odium
IAF, do not try to debate by throwing insults around.
The man has not called for the muder of Jewish people, you are instead of creating a logical debate attempting to bring it down to race.

Really and statements like this are "dening ignorance" ??
What race does one have to be to hate Jews?? Is their some racial pattern or some physical predispositon for hate ??
It is you who instead on concentrating on what I have presented seek rather to commit ad hominem attacks against any that voice their opinions for the Jews. Isnt that yet another attempt to side track this thread from the facts and instead resort to attacking the people who bring the facts.
I called his statements as anti-semetic because upon reading all his posts on this thread and his juvenille insults directed at any who voice their opinions that support the Jews, I felt that his statements where anti-semetic.
Which in itself is not insulting unless you are practising it anyway and someone points its out to you !

In fact, it is a joke - like many peoples actions on here. I'll remember to call anyone Anti-British, because they dislike New Labour? Or Anti-American because they dislike the Republican Party? Sorry, world doesn't work like that.

I cant see what this has to do with anything. Their is no political or govenrmental reference in my post. It is about history and the facts as they are presented.
What is indeed a joke is your advocacy for something that doesnt concern you at all.

[edit on 29-1-2006 by IAF101]

I called his statements as anti-semetic because upon reading all his posts on this thread and his juvenille insults directed at any who voice their opinions that support the Jews, I felt that his statements where anti-semetic.

I read them all too, and not a single one seemed the least bit Anti-Semitic.

Anti-Zionist Extremism maybe...

Has it really reached the point where equallity equals hatred of Jews?

PLEASE provide a quote of where he, or anyone else said anything Anti-Semitic.

Originally posted by grover
You are a fool.

Well I think the world of you as well !!

The name, Palestine doesn't appear in the Bible either. What's your point?

The point is that the term Palestine refers to the Roman designation of philistinia for the southern part of judea and the coastal plains. It essentially refers to the Roman-Jewish ancestory of the land. The Muslims saw this as a Jewish and thus were against the name. They identified themselves with damasus as I have already said and then changed their tune to suite their needs when the zionists came. Thus it would be wrong to associate the Arab bedouins of the land to Palaestine.

Originally posted by IAF101

The point is that the term Palestine refers to the Roman designation of philistinia for the southern part of judea and the coastal plains. It essentially refers to the Roman-Jewish ancestory of the land. The Muslims saw this as a Jewish and thus were against the name. They identified themselves with damasus as I have already said and then changed their tune to suite their needs when the zionists came. Thus it would be wrong to associate the Arab bedouins of the land to Palaestine.

You are mistaken.

That may have been the origin of the word, but it was not applied to the land in modern times until the British occupied after WWI.

The Brits named it Palestine.

The Arabs saw this as Jewish because they were aware of the Balfour Declaration where the Brits submitted to the Jewish Zionists.

They were conquered, and divided because Lord Rothschild asked.

For the same reason massive Jewish immigration followed with the eventual division of Palestine with a racist Israeli State emerging without the support of any of the peaople in the land other than the Jews.

[edit on 29-1-2006 by ArchAngel]

Originally posted by ArchAngel
You are mistaken.
The Brits named it Palestine.
The Arabs saw this as Jewish because they were aware of the Balfour Declaration where the Brits submitted to the Jewish Zionists.

How so ?? Let me quote what was written in my last post on page 4.

Also the Muslim bedoiuns in that land hated the term "Palaestine" because it signified the Jewsih-Chrisitan heritage of the land and this was repugnant to them. They have NEVER identified themselves as Palaestinians. They always claim themselves to be either Syrian or from the Islamic empires. It was the British, who due to their lack of understanding carved out a land in the middle east called Palaestine which the arabs resented strongly. No prominent Muslim voices endorsed the delineation of Palestine in 1920; all protested it. They directed their allegeince to Damascus and thus calling themselves as Southern Syrians. But the French destroued the Syrian kingdom and thus these "southeners" were left in the dark. They then manuvered around to calling themselves as Palaestinians- who they claimed were the original inhabitants of the land. The British blindly accepted them as so and THAT is how they got their name.

Isnt this what you have said ??

For the same reason massive Jewish immigration followed with the eventual division of Palestine with a racist Israeli State emerging without the support of any of the peaople in the land other than the Jews.

That is incorrect. The Zionists that planned the state of Isreal had in fact been to the land of "Palaestine" and met the arab leaders of the land. They were welcomed to the land as bringers of wealth, development and prosperity which the arabs wanted badly. The British also encourages the zionists to this end.
The Actual Israeli State that would be set up cannot be called a " racist Israeli State " at all because Jews are essentially multi-racial with Ethiopian jews, European Jews, Middle eastern Jews etc. Thus equating race to zionism is fallacious to say the least.

Everybody, This is an issue with huge ramifications. Please conduct the debate surrounding it with a bit of decorum

Insults, personal attacks and the like add nothing to the debate at hand.

Thanks
Fred

The Actual Israeli State that would be set up cannot be called a " racist Israeli State " at all because Jews are essentially multi-racial with Ethiopian jews, European Jews, Middle eastern Jews etc. Thus equating race to zionism is fallacious to say the least.

If their laws discriminate against non-jews, and it is not racsism, what is it then?

Israel is a Jewish Bigot State?

big·ot (bĭg'ət) pronunciation
n.

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Source

As opposed to the surrounding nations in the middle east which are so VERY tolerant of people of the Jewish faith right Arch?

Which nations are bigoted? The one that allows the Muslim religious body full control over their holy sites etc or the neighboring states that used to have Jewish populations but successfully either killed them or persecuted them until they picked up and ran.

Bigot?

Well thanks for the Sunday morning funnies, though I didn't expect them on an ATSNN post.

As opposed to the surrounding nations in the middle east which are so VERY tolerant of people of the Jewish faith right Arch?

Does this excuse Israel?

Jews lived in all of the mideast nations until the creation of Israel.

PLEASE provide a source to where any of those nations forced them to move to Israel.

JUST ONE!

NO HE IS NOT A GOOD BLOKE when he is claiming that I am racist and reading into my posts things I never said, or would say. How about you are sadly mistaken instead? It would be far more accurate. I personally take the charge of racism as deeply offensive, far more so than referring to someone (or being referred to) as a fool. Anyone who knows me personally knows I am not racist by any stretch of the imagination.........How many times do I have to say this...JUST BECAUSE I DISAGREE DOES NOT MAKE ME RACIST, OR HATE FILLED OR ANY OTHER SUCH THING.

IAF101, I'll make this nice and simple for you.

If you disagree with Israeli and the Israeli Policy, you are not Anti-Jewish. If you disagree with the Zionist Political ideology, that does not make you anti-Jewish.

Provide a quote, where he makes an attack against Jewish people and shows it to us all. Otherwise, stop using the term to try and win your arguement. You are insulting him and spreading misinformation.

There are only two types of Anti-Semitism, Religion which is based around the dislike/hatred of the Jewish Religion or Racial anti-Semitism, which is based around the concept of race, which existed in the 19th century. The idea of "New-Anti-Semitism" is in fact a joke.

If you disagree with the Nation of Islam, that doesn't make you "Anti-Black". If you disagree with Zionism, it doesn't make you an Anti-Sematic. Until people can move away from such logical fallacies, this debate will never be resolved and the problems in the Middle East will continue.

Odium, I'll make it very simple for you.
When you claim to not hate Jews, but you are against Israel existing, when you warp, twist and pervert the facts, claiming to simply be anti-Zionist should be followed by a nudge and a wink.
I do not think that IAF is a fool or dim, and I know that I am not.

By the way, I didn't see you attempt to play mod when the words "dim" and "fool" were tossed around. Leave modding to the professionals. That is why we have FredT.

Now, let me explain to you what Zionism is. It is the belief that the Jews should have a homeland, and that homeland should be their original homeland.
So, that would make it anti-"Sematic" (sic).
Read this, it should help as well:

www.jewishjournal.com...

As a form of racism, anti-Zionism is worse than anti-Semitism. It targets the most vulnerable part of the Jewish people, namely, the people of Israel, who rely on the sovereignty of their state for physical safety, national identity and personal dignity. To put it more bluntly, anti-Zionism condemns 5 million human beings, mostly refugees or children of refugees, to eternal statelessness, traumatized by historical images of persecution and genocide.

Anti-Zionism also attacks the pivotal component of our identity, the glue that bonds us together � our nationhood, our history.

[edit on 29-1-2006 by Thomas Crowne]

When you claim to not hate Jews, but you are against Israel existing, when you warp, twist and pervert the facts, claiming to simply be anti-Zionist should be followed by a nudge and a wink.
I do not think that IAF is a fool or dim, and I know that I am not.

I don't believe anyone here denied Israel the right to exist.

The arguments are against the occupation of territories taken in the 1967 land grab, and attempts to explain why many Palestinians deny Israel the right to exist.

Anti-Zionism is not equal to Anti-Semitism.

Not all Jews are Zionists:

Traditional Jews Are Not Zionists

Although there are those who refuse to accept the teachings of our Rabbis and will continue to support the Zionist state, there are also many who are totally unaware of the history of Zionism and its contradiction to the beliefs of Torah-True Jews.

And not all Zionists are Jews.

Jews are a minority compared to the Christian Zionists.

Your description of Zionism ended after the 1948 conflict.

Then Zionism became the expansion of the Zionist State of Israel at the expense of the native Palestinians.

[edit on 29-1-2006 by ArchAngel]

Are you incapable of reading, ArchAngel? The alleged land grab was made perfectly clear to be a warped, twisted propaganda lie, so why must you continue to make such statments?
Must I copy and paste another one of my clear posts so that you can see it as a stand alone statement?

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Are you incapable of reading, ArchAngel? The alleged land grab was made perfectly clear to be a warped, twisted propaganda lie, so why must you continue to make such statments?
Must I copy and paste another one of my clear posts so that you can see it as a stand alone statement?

Lets take a look at the term land grab.

Land

Grab

Israel before 1967 Sneak Attack and today:

Source

Israel 'grabbed' land that was not theirs, and still occupy it today.

It was a landgrab.

I must have missed your rant where you spun this into something else, but it would not be the first time logic evaded you.

[edit on 29-1-2006 by ArchAngel]

Wow! Those guys live in Brooklyn, New York! No wonder they are so confused, ArchAngel!

As far as the "Palestinians" are concerned, I made it clear through the actual words of the Arabs from back then,that there is no such thing as an Arabic Palestine, that this word, as well as the population class, is a contrived word for political purposes, and that they belong to Greater Syria.

This being the case, it would make only logical and non-hateful sense that you two go and partition the Syrian government to bring their people home, as they should. Otherwise, you are simply barking up the same tree that obviously has no coon in it.

Ok, ArchAngel. Here is the truth and fact that you can't seemto grasp. Of course, I am not surprised you missed it, it is in this same thread. Here is a copy of that part:

I would like to take the time to address one more lie that I have read, and that the 1967 War was a sneak attack. It is insinuated that the Israelis acted out of a land grab. This is absurd when one looks at some very revealing facts.
Arab terrorist attacks were numerous before the ’67 war. In the two years beforehand, there were 76 of them. There were an additional 37 attacks launched in the first quarter of ’67. Syrian attacks from the Golan Heights seem to be not mentioned in the assertion that Israel’s preemptive strike was deceitful. It is also not mentioned that on May 15, Egyptian troops were massing near the Israeli border in the Sinai, and Syrian troops were making ready for war in the Golan Heights. The Arabs ordered the U.N. Emergency Force out of the Sinai and the Voice of the Arabs declared this on 18 May:
“As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel. We shall exercise patience no more. We shall not complain anymore to the U.N. about Israel. The sole method we shall apply against Israel is total war, which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence.”

I don’t think I have to go any farther in regard to the ’67 War. As a matter of fact, this is a good place to stop for the time being.

this is my last post on this subject.

Let me make some things absolutely clear;

I am not a racist, nor do I advocate the destruction of Israel or support Islam over either Judasim or Christianity and never have, nor do I support Palestinian terrorism and I am deeply offended by claims otherwise. I know what I have written here. If you are so blinded by your own ideology that you cannot tell the difference, that is your problem, not mine.

Are you yourselves so filled with your own ideology (or hate) that you cannot put yourselves in Palestinian shoes and attempt to understand the sources of their angst? I sympthize with the Jews. All the Palestianian attacks against Israel over the course of the past 60 years pales in comparrison to what the Christians have put them through over the course of a thousand years though. Bigotry is ugly period, but when it takes on religious overtones, it is obscene. One of the most profound and deeply spiritual books I have ever read is called "Hasadic Tales of the Holocaust", it was so powerful I doubt I will ever be able to read it again, but it sits in a place of honor on my bookcase. I also sympthize with what the average Palestinian has been through as well. Whether you call them hate filled fanatics or long suffering pawns, depends on your point of view I guess, but the average person on the West Bank and Gaza wants what everyone else wants, a home, security and a job and not to be treated as second class and peace. And while this is true, it is also true desperation breeds desperate mesures.

I am not so blinded by my ideologies that I cannot look at that long and bloody history and call both sides fools and traitors to their causes. I can also look at both sides and see the flesh and blood human suffering there and feel sympthy and pity as well. Just as I can walk into a synogogue, a mosque, a catherdral and a temple and find GOD in all of them. Can any of you who are always on the attack, make such a claim? I doubt it seriously...Again to quote the Roman playwrite Terence, "I am a man, nothing human is alien to me." Before you go on condemning and accusing others of hatred and bigotry, look inside.