The Lies of the PA knows no bounds

reply to post by Zamini

You mention anthropology, a science, and then bring in the bible to do what exactly? Make yourself look like a clown? Make yourself look like someone who wants to win over "christian" hearts?

Uh huh.... Bigot much? So now everyone who believes in the Bible is a moron? And actually, i didnt say that as an appeal to Christians. Its my own personal belief. Additionally, the bible DOES infact say that the Jewish people will return to Israel, so that must account for something, shouldnt it?

It amazes me how secularists want to arbitrate between the Israeli and Palestinians, using "democracy" and "international law", when the simple fact is: Both parties, Jew and Arab, make claim to Israel and Jerusalem on religious grounds. There is a certain centrality to this land to the Jews and the Muslims (adopting this perception from the Jews) aswell believe Jerusalem, and so all of Israel (which to them should fall under the term "Dar Al Islam", which means "house of submission") should be under Islamic government....This despite the fact that the Quran belies their claim to it.

Cognitive dissonance. I bet in cases with open religious nutters like yourself it will most definitely lead into a psychosis of some sorts. Fingers crossed to that.

Um... what cognitive dissonance? Do you know what that term means? You know, not everyone understands the Torah and writings in the way of christian fundamentalists. Im not a Christian, first of all, and second, a great deal of the Bible is allegory - cloaking a philosophy...

So if you had actually been a philosophically minded person, you would understand that there is no real conflict between religion - when philosophically understood (and not everyone is so fortunate to understand the inner meaning of the Torah/prophets/writings) and science. They deal with two disparate aspects of reality. Science cannot touch the metaphysical; it cannot concern itself with values, or meaning, and likewise, Science has its own sphere of reality; dealing with concrete things.

reply to post by dontreally


So, dontreally. I've gone over this with you at least... what, seven times now? Explaining the history of the region, Jewish history, the ancestry of the Palestinians, all of it.

You never write back. Instead you just skip off and try to start the topic over again.

Abbas is right; the people ancestral to the Palestinians (and ancestral to the ancient Israelites) have history out there stretching to the Neolithic. However, Jews as such can only trace back to three thousand years ago. Because that's the earliest point at which Judaism was founded. Duh? I mean you really can't have "Jews" without "Judaism" now can you?

Further, these ancestral people followed a pretty easy-to-follow religious and political trajectory. They started out as pagan Canaanite tribes. Then they came under Egyptian rule. At some point under Egyptian rule, they adopted Judaism, and managed to form two kingdoms, tributaries to Egypt. later they were conquered by the Persians, then the Macedonians, then the Romans. Somewhere in the middle of the Roman period, some guerrilla bands of the locals started a war with the Romans, and lost - their leaders were dispersed around the empire, and life carried on. Late in the Roman period, Christianity caught on, and many of these people converted. For a while they fell under the rule of the Byzantine Roman Empire. When Omar and his army came in the 700's, the territory and its people fell under Arab rule. Many converted to Islam, for the same reasons they had converted to Christianity earlier - economics. There's a period of back-and-forth between the Arabs, Franks, and Turks, and the territory ends up a Turkish holding for a long damn time.

When European Jews - some of them distant descendants of those long-exiled revolt leaders - started migrating to the Levant, they were finding the descendants of the people their holy books are about. To justify their militarized attempt at Ashkenazi Colonialism, they conjured this mythology of the place having been totally empty, and that the people who lived there were "Arab invaders" (which is awkward - if nobody lived there, how would 'arab invaders' have lived there?). The European powers, who had only the very vaguest grasp of or interest in history outside of Europe, just sort of shrugged and went along with it.

I guess what I'm saying, dontreally, is that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You never do. You run away when confronted by anyone who DOES, and then pretend you'd never heard such things when you renew the topic as though you'd never been schooled. it's silly.

Originally posted by dontreally
Uh huh.... Bigot much? So now everyone who believes in the Bible is a moron? And actually, i didnt say that as an appeal to Christians. Its my own personal belief. Additionally, the bible DOES infact say that the Jewish people will return to Israel, so that must account for something, shouldnt it?

Yes, anyone who uses a religious text as a scientific / political how-to guide is a moron. And no, the fact that the bible says as much doesn't going for anything - for one, the Israel in the bible does not resemble the modern state of Israel - not in language, not in custom, not in religion, not in ethnicity, not in culture, not in territory. Modern Israel is a modern invention that was named after a kingdom in the Bible, because the people who invented the country thought that they were going to make Jesus come here faster by fulfilling prophecy and forcing God to advance his schedule.

Like I said; morons.

It amazes me how secularists want to arbitrate between the Israeli and Palestinians, using "democracy" and "international law", when the simple fact is: Both parties, Jew and Arab, make claim to Israel and Jerusalem on religious grounds. There is a certain centrality to this land to the Jews and the Muslims (adopting this perception from the Jews) aswell believe Jerusalem, and so all of Israel (which to them should fall under the term "Dar Al Islam", which means "house of submission") should be under Islamic government....This despite the fact that the Quran belies their claim to it.

Some parties among the Palestinians use religious claims, sure. But even they focus primarily on the legal territorial claims, international agreements, and natural right, instead of "our religion says blah, so you have to blah blah." Yes, Muslims want authority over the Al-Aqsa mosque. For the same reason Catholics want authority over Catholic cathedrals. Duh?

Um... what cognitive dissonance? Do you know what that term means? You know, not everyone understands the Torah and writings in the way of christian fundamentalists. Im not a Christian, first of all, and second, a great deal of the Bible is allegory - cloaking a philosophy...

So if you had actually been a philosophically minded person, you would understand that there is no real conflict between religion - when philosophically understood (and not everyone is so fortunate to understand the inner meaning of the Torah/prophets/writings) and science. They deal with two disparate aspects of reality. Science cannot touch the metaphysical; it cannot concern itself with values, or meaning, and likewise, Science has its own sphere of reality; dealing with concrete things.

Religion doesn't deal with values or meaning, either; it's a system whereby authority is granted to ruling castes and that justifies the oppression of "lessers." it is a system of social indoctrination that hinges on sowing elitist privilege among the few and subservient fear among the many. it is thus a self-perpetuating guidebook for inequality and subjugation.

Science is not divorced from religion; Religion falls under scientific scrutiny. You don't get to say "nuh uh, no science here!" - your religious views are scientifically lacking, and thus can easily be dismissed as false. Science has yet to determine whether you just like playing pretend, or whether you might have a delusional mental disorder that subjects you to believing in irrational, unprovable things that actually cause you harm and distress when you believe in them.

Originally posted by Nammu
reply to post by JohhnyBGood

 

Do remember that common law, historic literature and science, which we so adamently count as the basis of our western culture, had Islamic origins.

Disagree. the vast majority of 'Western Society/Civilization' descends from the Greco-Roman era with a heavy dose of Christian morality and values (and much of Christianity is historically based on the medieval Catholic church which itself is almost an extension of Rome). there of course is some Islam influence (esp in Spain) and some Norse/Pagan heritage.

"The State of Israel was created in a peaceful and legal process by the United Nations. It was not created out of Palestinian lands, but rather out of the Ottoman Empire, which had been ruled for 400 years by the Turks who lost it when they, fighting alongside Germany, were defeated in World War I. There were no “Palestinian” lands at the time because there were no people claiming to be Palestinians, but rather simply Arabs who lived in the region of Palestine.
It was only after World War I that the present states of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq were also created – also out of the Turkish Empire by the British and French victors. Jordan was created on about 80 percent of the Palestine Mandate, which was originally designated by the League of Nations as part of the Jewish homeland. Since then, Jews have been prohibited from owning property there."
David Meir Levi www.discoverthenetworks.org...

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

Abbas is right; the people ancestral to the Palestinians (and ancestral to the ancient Israelites) have history out there stretching to the Neolithic. However, Jews as such can only trace back to three thousand years ago. Because that's the earliest point at which Judaism was founded. Duh? I mean you really can't have "Jews" without "Judaism" now can you?

Do you want to be logical for a second??? OK?

If you wanted, we can trace everyone back to the first cave men in Ethiopia.. If you wanted. But that isnt relevant. We only have a genetic connection to those cavemen and such a connection isnt anthropologically speaking, meaningful. A MEANINGFUL relationship between the present and the past occurs through the following criteria:'

Language
History
Culture
Religion

If you share these 4 aspects with your ancestors 3500 years back, than you very much are a continuation of their spiritual tradition. You spoke the same language and thus shared the exact same fundamental core beliefs. The history of the Jews is a continuation of the history of their ancestors. Just as they were persecuted in Egypt, so to were their ancestors persecuted. Just as they were forced to carry the yoke of Egyptian servtitude, so to have they had to carry the yoke of edom and Ishmael - the two kingdoms they have lived under for a thousand plus years. Theres a continuity here that there is absolutely NO cognate in "palestinian" history.

As i explained before, the Arabs of Palestine share the exact same anthropological traits with other Arabs; whether in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen or Libya. They have the same language - Arabic, the same history - Islamic history, beginning in the last 7th century, the same culture, and the same religion - Islam. This is the thread that links all Arab peoples together.... Thus, what connection is there with the canaanites? None. Whatsover. How can the relationship be made anymore significant then the relationship of an American living in Chicago and a native indian living in "chicago" 2000 years earlier? Because it is the same land? Thats the most that can be said, and it is a superficial relationship.

At some point under Egyptian rule, they adopted Judaism, and managed to form two kingdoms,

This is just really poor scholarship. "At some point they just adopted Judaism"??? Thats absurd. The only history of the subject we have is what the bible says. The bible says they went down to Egypt - 70 people - and left Egypt a nation. Yes, an "Arav Rav", a mixed multitude, went out with them. But there was no 'adoption of Judaism". To be sure, Judaism hadnt even existed then. It was simple monotheism, a belief in the one G-d, creator of the universe.

When European Jews - some of them distant descendants of those long-exiled revolt leaders - started migrating to the Levant, they were finding the descendants of the people their holy books are about.

Huh? do you know when "Jews" starting "migrating to the levant"? Do you know when this messianic imperative picked up steam? In the 16th century. There are plenty of letters, and Jewish delegates for communites travelling from community to community in the European diaspora seeking alms to support the Jerusalem, Safed, Tiberias and Hebron communities living in Israel. Furthermore, there has always been a Jewish presence throughout the Jewish exile in Judea and Samaria and the Galilee... These numbers simply increased due to certain mystical considerations at the beginning of the 16th century. The numbers living in Israel at that time were around 25,000.

To justify their militarized attempt at Ashkenazi Colonialism, they conjured this mythology of the place having been totally empty, and that the people who lived there were "Arab invaders" (which is awkward - if nobody lived there, how would 'arab invaders' have lived there?)

Again.. what? Do you know anything about this history? Then what was mark twains "the innocents abroad" about? He was writing in 1869 and he himself described the land as 'desolate and barren" and being in being kept in very poor condition by the turkish authorities.... And there are still many other books from earlier that corroborate Twains assertions of the land being "desolate and barren". This wasnt a zionist invention or myth. It was a reality. The Jews were the ones who settled developed the land...and on their footsteps came the Arabs in the late 19th early 20th centuries...eventually assisted by the British to take Jobs being created by Jewish investment for Jewish laborers, thus filling the labor quota and preventing further Jewish immigration into the land.

I guess what I'm saying, dontreally, is that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You never do. You run away when confronted by anyone who DOES, and then pretend you'd never heard such things when you renew the topic as though you'd never been schooled. it's silly.

Whats silly is that you actually believe that..

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by dontreally

Science is not divorced from religion; Religion falls under scientific scrutiny. You don't get to say "nuh uh, no science here!" - your religious views are scientifically lacking, and thus can easily be dismissed as false. Science has yet to determine whether you just like playing pretend, or whether you might have a delusional mental disorder that subjects you to believing in irrational, unprovable things that actually cause you harm and distress when you believe in them.

You really are a full bown Nazi, in every sense of the Term./

Just as the Nazis were intrigued by Buddhism, as are you. And you and them share much more in common then that. Apparently anything that doesnt fit your 'scientific' religious ideals, which in any case is based on a personal philosophy which adheres to your own logic, is moronic, and unaccetpible.

This is why i dont talk to you. Its because youre a Nazi - and a sophist, ignorant, buddhist, hypocrtical one at that.

Really? Really?!

You are spouting the same exact bull#; a "personal philosophy which adheres to your own logic", and it too is moronic. You are honestly going to resort to calling him a Nazi?

Pathetic.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Since i think i know enough about history and political/religious background of the area, i can help you with certain facts

Abbas is right; the people ancestral to the Palestinians (and ancestral to the ancient Israelites) have history out there stretching to the Neolithic. However, Jews as such can only trace back to three thousand years ago. Because that's the earliest point at which Judaism was founded. Duh? I mean you really can't have "Jews" without "Judaism" now can you?

Abbas is wrong. Earliest settlement of the area and civilizations living in the area can be traced to more then 10000 years ago. Jericho area for example. However people who lived there are just as ancestral to Palestinians or Israelis as modern Australians,British,American,Russian,Egyptians and ctr (except maybe India and China , but i do not know enough about them). There were numerous genocides, ethnic cleansings, relocations of populations in this area throughout those thousands of years,some of them recorded.
There is nothing - not ethnicity ,not culture, not language and not religion that connects modern Palestinians or Israelis to people who lived here 10000 or "mere" 7000 years ago here.
So modern Palestinian claim is based only on the fact that ancestors of people who for less then hundred years consider them-self Palestinians as opposed to Jordanians or Syrians or Egyptians (for example) lived in the area for about thousand years constantly under foreign rule without any reason to separate them-self from people living under foreign rule in what is now Syria or Lebanon or Jordan or Iraq, and on the same international political agreements that Israeli political side of the claim is based upon.

Further, these ancestral people followed a pretty easy-to-follow religious and political trajectory. They started out as pagan Canaanite tribes. Then they came under Egyptian rule. At some point under Egyptian rule, they adopted Judaism, and managed to form two kingdoms, tributaries to Egypt. later they were conquered by the Persians, then the Macedonians, then the Romans. Somewhere in the middle of the Roman period, some guerrilla bands of the locals started a war with the Romans, and lost - their leaders were dispersed around the empire, and life carried on. Late in the Roman period, Christianity caught on, and many of these people converted. For a while they fell under the rule of the Byzantine Roman Empire. When Omar and his army came in the 700's, the territory and its people fell under Arab rule. Many converted to Islam, for the same reasons they had converted to Christianity earlier - economics. There's a period of back-and-forth between the Arabs, Franks, and Turks, and the territory ends up a Turkish holding for a long damn time.

So here are corrections - before Canaanite tribes there were different tribes. Like - Natufians. Canaanite tribes came from Syria and established their city states. Then Philistines (rings a bell?) invaded and established their own strongholds. All those paid tribute to Egypt but were independent. Then to this mess came Hebrew tribes and first historical story of genocide of earlier local population (archeology still cannot support it but it is more logical to accept that those tribes came from indeed abroad then to consider that some locals started to undermine their own position by declaring that they are foreign invaders) . Then there is brief period of Israeli kingdoms ,then Assyrians invaded removing majority of population from Northern kingdom (Israel) and other locals who were part of the same anti Assyrian alliance and settling them somewhere else and probably settling someone else in Israel since population exchange was their habit everywhere, then Babylonians invaded removing part of population from Judea. Even more fled to Egypt after political assasination of Gedaliyah. Then there was Persian rule, then there was Macedonian/Seleucid/Ptolemaic rule (did you know that Alexander the great took Gaza and killed or sold to slavery all locals and then brought foreigners to settle there? Ancestral,you say....) with establishment of scores of foreign Greek and Nabateean "colonies". Then again independence ,after rebellion and then Roman rule.Then Byzantia, brief period of Persian control and in 630- 640 Muslim control. Then Turks,Crusaders, Mongols, Mamluks in rapid succession with many battles fought in the area with many dead and refugees. Then loong period under Ottoman empire (with Napoleon slaughtering people in Jaffa and riots against Jews in Tiberia and Tsfat) and then British.

When European Jews - some of them distant descendants of those long-exiled revolt leaders - started migrating to the Levant, they were finding the descendants of the people their holy books are about. To justify their militarized attempt at Ashkenazi Colonialism, they conjured this mythology of the place having been totally empty, and that the people who lived there were "Arab invaders" (which is awkward - if nobody lived there, how would 'arab invaders' have lived there?). The European powers, who had only the very vaguest grasp of or interest in history outside of Europe, just sort of shrugged and went along with it.

Descendants part might be true for tiny minority. Just there might be few descendants of Celts in Britain. But Ashkenazi colonialism? Really? Colony of what, exactly? Ans as for Arabs - majority on non-Jews in Israel indeed consider themself Arabs. Who are certainly not Knaanites or Philistines. But from ARABian peninsula. It is similar to modern Jewish Israelis declaring them-self Europeans and simultaneously stating that they have local ancestral roots.

reply to post by Konah


There is a difference....

My view understands the inherent, logical separation between quality and quantity. Because I acknowledge this separation, science which deals with quantities wont interfere with religion which deals with qualities. They may 'interact' with one another, but thats about it.

My personal beliefs dont regard other beliefs as 'inherently' irrational, as long as they encourage proper moral behavior. In this sense, i leave 'quality', ie; the value system of the person alone. I dont impose science - which by definition can only concern itself with quantities and conrete realities, on ones own personal beliefs. This is tantamount to what the Nazis did. Did they have any tolerance for biblical faith? Is there any trace of the libertarian concept of the "freedom of religion" which America was based upon? None. Whatsoever.

This statement

your religious views are scientifically lacking, and thus can easily be dismissed as false. Science has yet to determine whether you just like playing pretend, or whether you might have a delusional mental disorder that subjects you to believing in irrational, unprovable things that actually cause you harm and distress when you believe in them.

Is remarkably ascerbic in its attack on biblical belief. He first asserts that if 'religion' is found to be "scientifically lacking" (what is that supposed to mean? Science again deals with QUANTITY - it cannot determine the value of any religious belief) than it can be deemed false. What then? He then caustically says that science - as if by science he means the academic community - has yet to determine whether us bible believers like playing pretend (this again ignores, or is ingnorant of, the philosophical interpretation of the Torah. Thus, he imagines everyone takes the book to be literal in every sense. As opposed to being literal in some verses which agree with reason, while allegorical in others) or, and this is the real Naziesque statement " have a delusional mental disorder". So now believing in the bible is a mental disorder? This is precisely what the Nazis would say if they managed to complete their paganization of christian society.

And then what about this.

"irrational, unprovable things that actually cause you harm and distress when you believe in them."

Whats irrational? Or unprovable? The idea of a creator is unprovable? So is your idea of there not being a creator. Infact, logic and inference is on my side, since something which appears so ordered and designed implies a creator.

And what distress? Now hes telling me that my religious beliefs are causing me harm and distress?

This is pure Nazi rhetoric. That is what i meant by that statement. He spoke that way, so i called him out on it.

Reply to post by SpeachM1litant

Actually, if you read the Torah, Abraham was promised com the Nile to the Euphrates.

Isaac was promised from the Nile to the Jordan.

The other son of Abraham, Ishmael is to have the rest.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Reply to post by TheWalkingFox

Your skewing of history is really obvious.

Just saying.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge


Thats a good point, seldom mentioned.

The empires of the past when conquering a new land would first eject the native inhabitants and implant new ones from foreign lands as a way to overcome the 'national spirit'; this is what was done by Sencherub when he finally took over Israel. The 10 tribes were booted out, and foreigners were brought it.

This was done all over the middleeast. Hence the absurdity of this claim of "9000" years of palestinian history. No. At most, some Arabs living in Palestine had ancestry in that region going back a few hudred years.

Israel was a COSMPOLITAN land. Christians from all over the Christian world came to settle in it; from the caucusus, balkans, germany, france, armenia, greece, turkey, in addition to the native Jewish populations and Jews from Both Europe/Asia and North Africa making aliyah.. For quite a long time, even after Muslim domination of the area, Christians and Jews formed a larger contigent of the population in Palestine..The Muslims merely had political control. Their power was not in numbers; not in Jerusalem - which in the old city was 75% Jewish, and not in the galilee, which was mostly Christian and Jewish.

And to add to it, the Jews contrary to propagandic claims brought RELIEF to the Arabs populations when they came in large numbers at the end of the 19th century.. The Arabs were being completely exploited by the Arab effendis who leveled exorbitant land taxes on the people. This is why many chose not to live there. And those that did, still had to deal with the invading bedouins who furthered their troubles by blackmailing them - if they wanted to keep their land/crops/lives they had to pay a yearly tax.

This is how the bedouins live. And it is commonly known that Bedouins are downright harsh people. Why else would someone choose to live in the desert?

Rabbi Against Zionism



Jews Denounce Israel




The most dangerous place for Jews is in Israel

reply to post by wcitizen


These people also constitute a very small minority of Orthodox Jews.

There also the most backward, and illogical, of religious

Funny that you would think these Jews at all represent Orthodox Jewry. Most Orthodox Jews are either Religious Zionist, or neutra.

Just listen to these guys speak. Half of them can barely speak english, let alone have read a secular book. Their 'wisdom' is confined to only jewish law, and unfortunately Jewish law is only suited to personal affairs. Not to the real world and its complicated political realities. They have no concept at all of how politics works. And so they naively think the Messiah will pop out of nowhere, maybe materialize out of nothing, and one day take over the world. It is such.........illogical nonsense. Judaism cannot be reconciled with such nonsense.

And you have nothing in common with these people. You only cite them because you think they strengthen your argument.

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by wcitizen

 

These people also constitute a very small minority of Orthodox Jews.

There also the most backward, and illogical, of religious

Funny that you would think these Jews at all represent Orthodox Jewry. Most Orthodox Jews are either Religious Zionist, or neutra.

Just listen to these guys speak. Half of them can barely speak english, let alone have read a secular book. Their 'wisdom' is confined to only jewish law, and unfortunately Jewish law is only suited to personal affairs. Not to the real world and its complicated political realities. They have no concept at all of how politics works. And so they naively think the Messiah will pop out of nowhere, maybe materialize out of nothing, and one day take over the world. It is such.........illogical nonsense. Judaism cannot be reconciled with such nonsense.

And you have nothing in common with these people. You only cite them because you think they strengthen your argument.

So:

You can't really call them nazis, so you call them the most backward and illogical - but actually their logic is very sound.

They are a minority, you say, so by extension you imply their views are irrelevant. Where's the logic in that?

You attribute motives to me based on no facts at all. That too lacks logic.

My observation of your replies on this thread leads me to conclude that you're not here to discuss, you're here to propagandise and browbeat.....and insult those who don't swallow the propaganda. What's new?

Reply to post by wcitizen

*He never called Orthodox Jews Nazi's.

*Their logic is not sound. Their main point of contention is that the nation was put in place by man, and not by God. As per the Tanakh, God will use whom He pleases to carry out his will.

*You were in fact trying to bolster the idea that Jews as a whole think this way.

*All I see in this thread is the refutation of what was claimed as factual by the PA, followed by "Anti-Zionist" rants.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

double post deleted.

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by wcitizen

 

*He never called Orthodox Jews Nazi's.

*Their logic is not sound. Their main point of contention is that the nation was put in place by man, and not by God. As per the Tanakh, God will use whom He pleases to carry out his will.

*You were in fact trying to bolster the idea that Jews as a whole think this way.

*All I see in this thread is the refutation of what was claimed as factual by the PA, followed by "Anti-Zionist" rants.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

No, he didn't - and that's what I said in my post. You misunderstood what I wrote. Comprehension problems?

SHOW ME where I insinuate that Jews as a whole think this way?

*All I see in this thread is the refutation of what was claimed as factual by the PA, followed by "Anti-Zionist" rants.

To claim something is a fact doesn't make it a fact. And one's interpretation of what one claims to be fact is only that, an interpretation.

Yes, I refute the propaganda posted by the OP. Is that a crime?

Yes, I'm anti-Zionist. That's my right.

No, I haven't been ranting. Comprehension problems much?

These people cannot be said to be either illiterate or illogical.

Website: Jews Against Racist Zionism
sites.google.com...

This site documents the views against racist Zionism of outstanding anti-racist, humanitarian Jewish scholars, leaders and writers

This site is inspired by our obligation to the 30 million victims of the WW2 European Holocaust and indeed to the victims of all other holocaust and genocide atrocities such as the 35 million Chinese killed by the Japanese in WW2 and the 6-7 million Indians starved to death by the British in the 1943-1945 WW2 Bengal Famine (see Gideon Polya, “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950”, G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007

All decent, anti-racist, humanitarians must vigorously oppose and sideline those supporting racist Zionism, Apartheid Israel and racist Western wars and occupations who are currently complicit in 0.7 million non-violent excess deaths annually; continuing, racist perversion of human rights, humanitarian values and rational discourse in the Western democracies; ignoring of worsening climate genocide (that may kill 10 billion non-Europeans this century through unaddressed man-made climate change); and egregious anti-Jewish anti-Semitism through falsely identifying decent, anti-racist Jews with these appalling crimes

This Holocaust survivor speaks from direct experience.


Holocaust Survivor Denounces Israel



Jewish Conscience Speaks Out