It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The mini giant awakens: 'Iran can also be wiped off the map' - Israel

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2006 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Mini giant is my own term. I did not show that in quotes anywhere, its silly to focus on that people.

And btw people: "jooo's" is a fairly racist way to say "Jew". Its no different than me saying "A-rabs". If you wouldnt say it that way in front of somebody, what makes you think its any less racist to state it that way here?

The topic people, apparantly I must remind you, is that Israel feels it and the world is capable of taking care of Iran as well.

Its funny, so many racists hide their hatred so well, but when it comes to Israel, the gloves come off...




posted on May, 10 2006 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Skippy:

The topic people, apparantly I must remind you, is that Israel feels it and the world is capable of taking care of Iran as well.


No, actually, you started the thread with :


Israel is starting to speak up, and frankly I like it.


And then:


The world needs to take its head out of the sand, the last time a world leader used the same rhetoric that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been using was in 1938 by a man called "Hitler", and we all know where that led. And remember: Hitler didnt have nuclear power or the oil reserves Iran has.


So, let’s review.

(1)You say that you are happy Israel threatened Iran.

(2)Also, you imply that the world needs to get behind Israel’s threat, and you put a few Hitler references in there just to muddy the waters.


Hitler didnt have nuclear power or the oil reserves Iran has.


Um, are you saying WWII Germany was less powerful than present day Iran? Smoke a lot of weed, do ya?

So what we have here is someone who says that Israel is right in ratcheting up the rhetoric, because this Iranian pres is as bad or worse than ADOLPH HITLER, and that the world should wake up and help. And he's coming right for us omigod!

THEN, you mislead:


] The topic people, apparantly I must remind you, is that Israel feels it and the world is capable of taking care of Iran as well.


No, your original topic was that ISRAEL feels capable of it, and the world needs to help.

Well, help yourself. If Israel wants a war, then do it. Use your own troops, your own army, spill your own blood and leave everyone out of it. Send the bill to the United States if you figure they'll pony up the dough, but stop playing on sympathy for something that happened so many years ago. Hitler did a lot of bad to a lot of people. He killed tens of millions of Russians, too. Should Russia attack Iran? I mean, the guy is Hitler Junior, right? Didn't the Russians and Hitler kinda not get along?


Its funny, so many racists hide their hatred so well, but when it comes to Israel, the gloves come off...


Funny, yeah. I was going to comment on your obvious milking of Jewish pain and suffering (let’s throw in a few “worse than Hitler” references), and that the world needs to follow Israel when Israel itself snubs the international community whenever it wants to. Haha, yeah, we'll be right over to help. But don't wait up.

Oh and by the way, ONCE MORE, criticism of Israeli policy is not criticism of the Jewish people as a whole. If I criticize Bush does it mean I hate all Americans?

Get a grip.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Mini giant is my own term. I did not show that in quotes anywhere, its silly to focus on that people.


I know it is, that's why I asked if you meant to post it. Not so much as a focus, just as an aside. Good oxymoron though.




And btw people: "jooo's" is a fairly racist way to say "Jew". Its no different than me saying "A-rabs". If you wouldnt say it that way in front of somebody, what makes you think its any less racist to state it that way here?


I agree, but joo and jew are pronounced the same, so it prolly would only offend on paper, not in front of somebody.



The topic people, apparantly I must remind you, is that Israel feels it and the world is capable of taking care of Iran as well.


But map wiping is not a good way to take care of Iran, IMO.



Its funny, so many racists hide their hatred so well, but when it comes to Israel, the gloves come off...


This whole conflict must be kinda confusing for proud racists like neo-nazi's and such, on the one hand they hate non-whites such as arabs, on the other hand they hate jews cuz Hitler did. Wonder if they just wanna see them all kill each other, oh well. But I think just about everybody can be considered racist in some way or another, they just choose to take of the gloves when it suits them best....Islam is as Islam does, right? Just sayin....



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Um, are you saying WWII Germany was less powerful than present day Iran?


Well, in all fairness Germany didn't have nukes, so if Iran gets some, technically they would be more powerful, right? Put modern day Iran with a fair arsenal of nuclear weapons (hypathetical at this point) against WWII Germany without them, I think Iran would win.



Smoke a lot of weed, do ya?


Now now, if somebody smoked alot of weed they probably wouldn't say they liked the thought of Israel wiping Iran off the map, don't ya think?


[edit on 10-5-2006 by 27jd]



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Israel is starting to speak up, and frankly I like it.


Hmm, I just re-read teh beginning of this thread.

Why is your sympaty thrown so firmly behind Israel, I pray tell?



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 02:55 PM
link   
I do not eve see why racism against a jew warrants a whole different term than racism against others. It is one and the same, and using a special term for their people makes it seem like they are special or something. I don't hate jews, and am not anti-semitic or anything. But seriously, I do not see why this country or their people are any more special than any other human beings on earth. Wow some guy tried to destroy their whole race three quarters of a century ago. Yea that was horrible.

But Native Americans are close to gone and have no real homeland anymore. They just have small tracts of land (which they are losing everyday) spread out across the continental United States. Their culture has pretty much been squashed.

Obviously everyone knows of the constant turmoil in Africa. Native tribes in the amazon rainforst are losing their homeland EVERYDAY to GLOBALIZATION! Where are the wars for them? How come none of these people deserve any world attention on the scale Israel and its people are recieving?

Boggles my mind really. I guess they are just too primitive and unimportant to worry about.

Israel would suffer some unfortunately massive casualties if it were to decide to start a war on its own. They are surrounded immediately by tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands armed and trained militants just waiting for a reason to spill into their borders in a matter of hours or less and murder everyone in sight.

I know how to solve the situation for this whole region. The leaders of Israel and the USA must simply publicly apologize to the people of the region and instead of making comments and dialogue of war and economic attacks, will ask for ideas on how to help them reconstruct and compensate for the troubles they have caused. Then both sides can forgive each other for the crimes they have both perpetuated, and the world can move on.

Oh what, are we just too macho to apologize for acts of aggression? Is that for pansies and sissies? I am sure many would think so. If I were theleader id just say "hey look I am sorry for everything man, I would like to make it up to you so we can ensure our citizens don't have to suffer no more. Lets work out some deals, we going to mind our business about how you choose to participate in your own affairs, if you could please cut down on any comments about threatening allies, we will do the same. Let us lead the world and show them how peace should be made. We need to stop talking about how we can destroy each other and why, and instead focus on how we can make lives for our citizens better"

I think that would help out alot. Leaders and citizens of foreign nations are human beings. Sometimes, a simple apology can go a long way the same as it goes in our own lives. It is like a bully suddenly saying to the guy he picks on "hey man look I am sorry for everything I have done, I have learned alot and would liek to make it up to you. How about we hang out at the mall or something. Pick up some girls you know, maybe catch the latest flick." Just instead of picking up girls and watching a movie, they would be opening up business and infrastructure investments as well as mutual friendship and whatnot.

Hell it looks like the president of Iran already tried that with his letter and apparantly Ms Rice was just too darn macho to accept it.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   
27id:

Well, in all fairness Germany didn't have nukes, so if Iran gets some, technically they would be more powerful, right? Put modern day Iran with a fair arsenal of nuclear weapons (hypathetical at this point) against WWII Germany without them, I think Iran would win.


Yeah, but I assumed we’re not talking about 1938 Germany vs 2006 Iran. The military power of Germany was strong enough to take over most of Europe. Iran, by comparison, would have a tough time taking over any of its’ neighbours, except maybe Iraq.

Germany had a strong enough army to hold off most of the world for a while. Iran? Meh.


DYepes:

The leaders of Israel and the USA must simply publicly apologize to the people of the region and instead of making comments and dialogue of war and economic attacks, will ask for ideas on how to help them reconstruct and compensate for the troubles they have caused. Then both sides can forgive each other for the crimes they have both perpetuated, and the world can move on.


Probably one of the single-most intelligent arguments I’ve heard. Let them apologize first, and then move forward from there.

People are very forgiving, as a rule, I find. They simply have to be given enough reason to feel it. And NOBODY wants to live in a state of fear and perpetual war. They don’t want it for their children either.

And so far, not a word of apology for the mess the USA and Israel have made of the Middle East.

No, I am not denying the actions of others (the UK carved out much of the Middle East so they also retain blame), but specifically those two countries have most of the illwill in the Arab world, earned or not.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Germany had a strong enough army to hold off most of the world for a while. Iran? Meh.


Well, I think a nuclear arsenal can compare with a strong army in terms of damage that can be done. If Iran does get nuclear weapons, it's a matter of what's in the heads of those in power there. It doesn't matter if the Iranian people are suicidal or not, if the rulers feel they can evade death and that there really will be some event regarding their religious beliefs, they may go for it. Not saying they will for sure or anything, but none of us really know. It may not be like the greedy nations that are motivated by money that were involved in the cold war, what if they really believe it's the will of god they are doing? (not like Bush, he's a fake)



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
not a word of apology for the mess the USA and
Israel have made of the Middle East.


The middle east would be a mess with or without America.
America has only been around for a few hundred years.
The Middle East has been a mess for 5,000 years.

We have nothing to apologize for. However, Hamas
DOES have something to apologize for... Arafat turning
down real peace at the Camp David talks that Clinton
pulled off. Ever see what was offered by the Jews and
refused by the 'palestinians'. Google it up. It'll amaze
ya!!


those two countries have most of the ill will
in the Arab world, earned or not.


Because ....

"Fight and slay the Unbelievers wherever ye find them.
Seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in
every stratagem of war." Qur'an, Sura 9:5

It's a major part of the religion of the region to hate Israel and
hate infidels. As long as their religion rules them they'll
hate us no matter what we do or don't do.

As long as there are religious fundamentalists mixed in with
the politics of a country, you get MESS. That goes for
Islamic fundamentalists as well as Christian fundamentalists
who mix religion and politics. (to those few that manage to be
in politics and NOT rule by religion ...
)



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 06:58 PM
link   
As a matter of fact according to this in Wikipedia Israel didn't offer squat to the Palestinians except more land for Israel.

The Palestinian negotiators indicated they wanted full Palestinian sovereignty over all the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, although they would consider a one-to-one land swap with Israel. As a starting point, Resolution 242 calls for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in the Six-Day War and at the 1993 Oslo Accords the Palestinian negotiators accepted the Green Line borders for the West Bank.

The proposal offered by Barak and Clinton at Camp David would have meant the Israeli annexation of 9-10% more of the West Bank. Another 9-10% of the West Bank would be placed under indefinite "Temporary Israeli Control", including a narrow strip comprising 15 % of the length of the border along the Jordan River. The West Bank would be separated by a road from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea, with free passage for Palestinians although Israel reserved the right to close the road for passage in case of emergency. The Palestinian position was that the annexations would block existing road networks between major Palestinian populations. In return, the Israelis would cede 1-3 % of their territory in the Negev Desert to Palestine. Arafat rejected this proposal and did not make a counteroffer.

Clayton Swisher, who was present at the summit, rebuts the conventional wisdom about it in The Truth About Camp David (www.mepc.org...). Swisher, a young scholar based in Washington, approaches Camp David objectively and concludes that the Israelis and the Americans were at least as guilty as the Palestinians for the collapse.

Source

If the annexation of up to 20% of the West Bank in return for 1-3% of harsh, dry, and barely hospitable desert seems like a fair and generous gift, then I guess they must be crazy for turning it down.


Soon after the collapse of the 2000 summit, Ariel Sharon and a delegation of Likud politicians took a tour of the Temple Mount to demonstrate Israel's control. The next day, a demonstration by a Palestinian crowd broke out of control and Israeli police opened fire on the protesters.

Instead of using gas, horses, or non-fatal crowd control methods, these merciless police forces began firing and killing people protesting. I personally do not believe this was the measure that should have been taken.

Either way, I believe Israel has decided to simply try to provoke Iran in an attempt to gather American action to any further Iranian responses as a result of it.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
... Arafat turning
down real peace at the Camp David talks that Clinton
pulled off. Ever see what was offered by the Jews and
refused by the 'palestinians'. Google it up. It'll amaze
ya!!


I looked it up and I was, as predicted, Amazed.


The Myth of the Generous Offer
snip
The annexations and security arrangements would divide the West Bank into three disconnected cantons. In exchange for taking fertile West Bank lands that happen to contain most of the region’s scarce water aquifers, Israel offered to give up a piece of its own territory in the Negev Desert--about one-tenth the size of the land it would annex--including a former toxic waste dump.

Because of the geographic placement of Israel’s proposed West Bank annexations, Palestinians living in their new “independent state” would be forced to cross Israeli territory every time they traveled or shipped goods from one section of the West Bank to another, and Israel could close those routes at will. Israel would also retain a network of so-called “bypass roads” that would crisscross the Palestinian state while remaining sovereign Israeli territory, further dividing the West Bank.

Israel was also to have kept "security control" for an indefinite period of time over the Jordan Valley, the strip of territory that forms the border between the West Bank and neighboring Jordan. Palestine would not have free access to its own international borders with Jordan and Egypt--putting Palestinian trade, and therefore its economy, at the mercy of the Israeli military.

Had Arafat agreed to these arrangements, the Palestinians would have permanently locked in place many of the worst aspects of the very occupation they were trying to bring to an end. For at Camp David, Israel also demanded that Arafat sign an "end-of-conflict" agreement stating that the decades-old war between Israel and the Palestinians was over and waiving all further claims against Israel.

More at source:
www.fair.org...


After looking at the maps of the Israeli proposal I was, again, Amazed.

www.palestineremembered.com...

Amazed that anyone could call this a generous offer instead of Attempted Armed Robbery.

Barak's Generous offer

And, of course, Israel gave themselves the Al Aqsa Mosque - Dome of the Rock - AKA: Temple Mount.

And an effective veto in the Palestinian Government.

What the Palestinians need is a partner for peace.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 10:30 PM
link   
This Elitist Liberal Dribble is becoming quite amusing. Enlightened, Knowledgeable, and Wishing to not knowingly spread false information. Ha! I guess that was thrown out the window in this Topic.

Lets for one dismiss this notion that Israel uprooted masses of peoples.

Is a guy named Mark Twain known to any of you? Mark Twain visited Jerusalem and the area in the 1860's and wrote in his book "The Innocents Abroad". Buy his book and read it.

His remarks, of the region?

"A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds"

"hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country."

"a silent mournful expanse"

"we never saw a human being on the whole route"

"a desolation"

Masses of Arab's? Funny In the 1900's, the area had a population totaling 120000 Arabs, that covered Israel Proper, and 600000 Arabs if including the West Bank and Jordan (According to the Ottomans). Most of which did not even live in Palestine, but in other areas. The Land was purchased from these Migrant Owners, and at a premium rate. The influx of wandering Arab's started to arrive once the Balfour Declaration was in it's infancy, and just prior to the State or Israel. They were seeking Medical Assistance and Opportunities for Advancment. Israel was clearing Swamp Land, and began agricultural farming, bringing more Arab's into the area. All these poor displaced people, we forget never lived there anyways

Oh, and this is good to. Are their any Arabs Speaking people here who would wish to confirm or deny this. Exactly what does the Word Palestine mean? All Arab words have meanings and most are based from the Koran. Where did this word ever come from?? Certainly not Arabs.

And to that matter, the Arab States had generally regarded Palestine as part of Syria, until late the last century.

But who gave this area this name?? The Romans and it was as an Insult against the Jew's who stood against the Holy Roman Empire. The word actually derived from Israel's worst Enemy, the Philistines, but evenually changed to Palaistaina, and further to become Palestine.

To further this premise try this:

Exactly who ran the Palestine Post for all those years?
Exactly who played in the Palestine Orchestra?
And I wonder who made up the Palestine Brigade Regiment?

Arab's? Well surprise, it was the our Jewish Brother.

Until this century, Palestine was a word which refered to the Jews.

And this is just a Tipped of FACT in respects to this matter.

It doesn't even account for Jews have always lives in Israel since it 1st became a nation.
It doesn't even account they have a Kingdom Claim dating back 3500 Years.
It doesn't even account the Original inhabitants are all long dead and buried cultures. (Philistines, Phoencians, Canaanites and none where Arabs)

Anyone who wishes, I'd be pleased to educate you on this, in it's own Topic.

But you are being fed a line of crap from Revisionist Historians and the MSM, and unfortunately, you seem to be enjoying the meal.

Ignorance is Bliss is a better term to use for the degenerating topic. This in a site that the emphasis is on, Ignorance Denied. Strange how that works isn't it.

And Agian, to the Topic, do none of you care that a Terrorist State and a Sponsor of Terrorists, will be getting Nukes? Wakeup people. Get your heads out of the Fuzzy Speak, and use some common sense.

Ciao

Shane





[edit on 10-5-2006 by Shane]



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 11:09 PM
link   
That word terrorism can apply even to the people you are attempting to defend as well as the people you are trying to negate.



Terrorism

The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property in order to coerce or intimidate a government or the civilian population in furtherance of political or social objectives.

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror or violence to achieve political goals. The targets of terrorism include government officials, identified individuals or groups, and innocent bystanders. In most cases terrorists seek to overthrow or destabilize an existing political regime, but totalitarian and dictatorial governments use terror to maintain their power.
Answe rs.com Legal Encyclopedia



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 11:50 PM
link   
*Mod Edit*

First off, I have seen seemingly pro-Israel people (Nygdan, I can say for sure has done this) use the term "joooos" when mocking people who blame Jews for everything. How the f- is it then anti-Jew for me to say the same thing?
Next, when did Israel represent the entire Jewish population of the planet? I'll say it again...

JEWS ARE NOT THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN ISRAEL!!!!

And finally, how the f- is it anti-Jewish to criticize Israel? Oh, I forgot that by the Zionist rulebook, it is. Thus, I have to constantly see the RETARDED Zionist catchphrase parrotted by people on this site. It is frickin RETARDED, yet people will still use it.

I see I only got 1 response (albeit apologistic) to the issues I raised concerning Zionists and Hitler. Not surprising. But, as SOON as you say ANYTHING CRITICAL of Israel, the Zionist catchphrase pops out of the woodwork.

I predict that at least 2 more people will use the Zionist catchphrase on this thread. I aslo predict that these people will refrain from talking about the bad stuff Zionists do in favor of slamming me with the Zionist catchphrase.

Hmmm...maybe I'm missing something. Do Zionists actually represent the entire Jewish people? Do they? I could have sworn that Orthodox Jews are against Israel.
I could have sworn that Orthodox Jews have demonstrations against Israel.
I could have sworn that Jews had a diaspora like us black people.


I guess I was wrong. I guess you are an anti-Semite (
, that kills me every time) if you criticize Israel. I guess you are an anti-Semite
if you don't like the Zionists. I guess YOU'RE the racist if you point out that Zionists are racist. How could I have been so mistaken.

Get the # outta here.


[edit on 11-5-2006 by Amuk]



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 12:09 AM
link   
OK, I'll say before anybody else does:

Zionists ARE racists.

No better than the neo-nazis who believe in "Aryan superiority" and German subjugation of nations for Lebensraum. No better than Ottomans wanting to kill all the Jews for Allah. No better than the people who enslaved Blacks believing to be "superior" to them for being white. It's the truth. Yet we can't judge foreign policy based on kooks. Sometimes people need to be pragmatic. You give Joseph's tomb to Hamas and they burn it down and convert it into a mosque. Not too much better. Youve got to take the lesser evil if world peace is to be preserved. It's that simple.

[edit on 11-5-2006 by Nakash]



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 12:17 AM
link   

If the statistics are right, the Jews constitute but one per cent of the human race. It suggests a nebulous dim puff of star dust lost in the blaze of the Milky Way. Properly the Jew ought hardly to be heard of; but he is heard of, has always been heard of.

He is as prominent on the planet as any other people, and his commercial importance is extravagantly out of proportion to the smallness of his bulk. His contributions to the world's list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance, medicine, and abstruse learning are also away out of proportion to the weakness of his numbers. He has made a marvelous fight in this world, in all the ages; and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself, and be excused for it. The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed, and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight now, or have vanished. The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?
Source


I thought that was an interesting statement while I was browsing around and would like to ask the question myself. What is it that makes the Jewish people immortal? The only other race on Earth that exists today as old as them would probably have to be the Chinese. But they are quite a different type of people in this day and age. I guess I will just have to accept that they are indded God's people. Seriously who else could withstand the test of time and live through the rise and fall of all of histories greatest empires. Hopefully America can share this immortality as long as we protect them, but at what cost? Unlike America, the Jews do not seek to conquer the world or spill unchecked into other nations borders, they just want a little piece ofland to call him and continue to contribute their culture and technology to the world.

I know to many who keep track of my opinions on Israel and the Jewish people would seem to see me as constantly flipping my opinions. Thats because I do not hold any solid feelings about it. Everytime I find another document or text I have to change my view as a result of the solid evidence. But now I have to honestly and undoubtedly accept that the Jews are indeed God's people like the bible has stated.

There is just no other explanation for their immortality as a people throughout time. However they will not give up their homeland, and the Arabs/Palestinians/Muslims seem to simply not accept a state of Israel.

So IMO the only way to avoid a bloody conflict (again) and war over this piece of land is to make it the first official land of the United Nations. It should not hold any specific "nationality" or allegiance. It will be the first piece of land whos dues are to the Global Body for unity, as well as have the benefits and protection of that Global Body entirely. The citizens of this land will be known as citizens of the world, not Palestine or Israel.

Does that sound crazy? I dunno. That way niether one would have claim of the land, but both of them will have the benefits of being citizens of it. Anyone can for that matter.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 09:47 AM
link   
FlyersFan:

The middle east would be a mess with or without America.
America has only been around for a few hundred years.
The Middle East has been a mess for 5,000 years.


Thanks for your illuminating response. Void of fact, any historical info, and purely 100% opinion. The Middle East has been a mess for 5000 years so it can’t be America’s fault. How delightfully pre-school.


It's a major part of the religion of the region to hate Israel and
hate infidels. As long as their religion rules them they'll
hate us no matter what we do or don't do.


Correct me if I’m wrong, but Zionism states that the Jewish people are supreme, the chosen people of G-d, and more important than any of us non-Jews. Um, where does that leave me?

Gentile is just another word for infidel. Ditto the word shiksa.

Why should I support a view that EXCLUDES me and 99% of the world. Logically it makes no sense. But looking at your response, maybe I should expect none?


Shane:

And Agian, to the Topic, do none of you care that a Terrorist State and a Sponsor of Terrorists, will be getting Nukes? Wakeup people. Get your heads out of the Fuzzy Speak, and use some common sense.


Well, Israel is a terrorist state and they have had nukes for a while… I’m still here.

Oh and here’s a newsflash: I do not live in Israel. When it comes down to it, the fact that Israel feels threatened by a nuclear Iran doesn’t concern me too much. Let them be afraid.

Let them actually do what everyone else in the world does: TALK WITH THEIR NEIGHBOURS. DISCUSS THE PROBLEMS AND THE POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS.

And if they can’t do that, well, again, that’s not my problem. If blood is to be spilled in defense of Israel, let it be Israeli, I say.


-----

We have people here posting historical documents showing how badly the Palestinians have been screwed, and all we get from the Pro-Israeli crew is bloodthirsty Koran quotes, Mark Twain's opinion (?), and emotional tirades...

My perspective is that Israel can fix its' own messes. Or it can't. With it's own money, or with the Americans'.

It's their country, and if they want to ignore the international community when it suits them, then they can expect nothing whatsoever from me or the rest of the world when they need us to put our lives on the line to save them.

Makes total sense to me.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
First off, I have seen seemingly pro-Israel people (Nygdan, I can say for sure has done this) use the term "joooos" when mocking people who blame Jews for everything. How the f- is it then anti-Jew for me to say the same thing


I guess it just depends on who reads it, right? I have not read Nygdan's "joo" posts, but it's no more or less anti-jew than when you type it. If you really wanna type "joo" instead of "jew" whatever. I'm not jewish, it doesn't offend me. Just know that some may get offended, some words can be offensive depending on who says them or how they're spelled, I'm sure you'd agree.



And finally, how the f- is it anti-Jewish to criticize Israel? Oh, I forgot that by the Zionist rulebook, it is.


Who said it was anti-jewish to criticize Israel?



I see I only got 1 response (albeit apologistic) to the issues I raised concerning Zionists and Hitler. Not surprising. But, as SOON as you say ANYTHING CRITICAL of Israel, the Zionist catchphrase pops out of the woodwork.


I assume you mean my response, please point out how I was apologistic. I was just pointing out that the arabs were in league with Hitler to a greater extent, so Hitler is irrelevant in this discussion really. Again, let the SOB die already. Also, I find it potentially hypocritical what you're saying about the zionist "catchphrase", you say you're black, I wonder what your reaction would be if I criticized the NAACP, affirmative action, or the many college funds set up for African Americans only. I can only assume you'd say I was racist, which I'm not.



I aslo predict that these people will refrain from talking about the bad stuff Zionists do in favor of slamming me with the Zionist catchphrase.


Zionists do plenty of bad stuff, so does the other side. Everybody is in the wrong.



Hmmm...maybe I'm missing something. Do Zionists actually represent the entire Jewish people? Do they? I could have sworn that Orthodox Jews are against Israel.
I could have sworn that Orthodox Jews have demonstrations against Israel.


Do orthodox jews represent the entire jewish people? What makes their position any more relevant than the zionists? Because you agree with it maybe? Aren't rastafarians zionists? Do they represent the entire black people? Nope. There are differing opinions across the board, nobody represents everybody...



I guess YOU'RE the racist if you point out that Zionists are racist. How could I have been so mistaken.


Kinda a blanket statement there, huh? Listen to Bob Marley sometime (iron lion zion, zion train, etc.)



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Heh, Rastafarians believe Halie Sellasie is the messiah. They couldn't care in the slightest about race wars and crap like that. Just smoke their weed and chill.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
Just smoke their weed and chill.


Too bad the rest of the world doesn't follow that example.


Here's an interesting article....



To take these theories and historical data even further,"black people were not merely like the Jews in terms of historical experience, they were the Jews."6 Ethiopian mythology projects the longings of the Africans to a Christian African nation under the"Lion of Judah, King of Kings,"but the Zionist mythical reasoning leads their thoughts to the Holy Land itself. The bible reveals to the Rastafarian people the history of their true identity and assures them that their judgment is not purely subjective. In the Rastafarian religion they know that they are descendant from the Jewish religion, but they believe that the bible is written by and about black people. When the bible speaks about the Israelites, the Rastas believe that they were writing about black people.
debate.uvm.edu...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join