A_NONY_MOUSE: Teach me to hate Israel
Offline A_Nony_Mouse, I've recently spent some time studying the origins of Israel and the history of that particular area of land throughout the millenia. I'm still having a hard time understanding your unrelenting and one-sided condemnation against Israel as the evil side of the battle. Personally I've found that in the formation of Israel the jews were far more accomodating and the arabs were adamant that it was their way or nothing. Period. No compromise. So, in the interest of expanding my understanding of the dynamics of the struggles on both sides of those people I would like to have an exchange of information with you to further my knowledge.
Not an argument, but more of a calm back and forth. So I can weasel out what people like you are thinking. Honestly, I'm just not getting the rationale behind Israel hate yet. And I suspect that there are underlying motivations in individuals like yourself other than factual truth at play. But that's just an assumption at this point I fully admit.
So to begin with, I would like to read your personal take on why you think the arabs have more of a right to that chunk of land than anyone else. Feel free to start back in history as far as you would like.
Thanks.
"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci
- Login to post comments
Offline Caesar did not deal with rebellious Gauls.
OK, repeat after me:
Very well documented history is not dealt with by saying what amounts to the schoolyard "Did not!".
Now write that out 500 times on the black board during recess or you will have to stay after school.
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."
=
- Login to post comments
Offline Hey Mr. Mouse.... Not sure if you've seen *this* delightful little video titled "How To Kill Goyim And Influence People -- Torat Ha'melech":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t_LxpCY2G8&feature=player_embedded
I retract my previous. My first impression was that it was related to the "How to cook a Goyim" some jewish kids put up.
This is rather about the mostly government salaried Rabbis (nice editorial in Haaretz last week, Any Bastard can be a Rabbi) preaching the literal words of the OT on the near obligation to kill anyone who is considered an enemy of Israel or who even appears to dislike Israel. This includes those who will grow up to be enemies of Israel -- kill infants and children. This is not implicit but usually spelled out so there is no misunderstanding.
This is nothing new and has been the official teaching as far back as the Talmud. There are many equally repugnant "laws" related to this.
Last year a book was published called The King's Torah which goes into detail on the subject. Finally he was arrested for inciting hatred. All of this would not be much of a problem if there were separation of church and state in Israel rather than the unity of the state with Judaism. But still it might not matter as Israel does have laws although their application is like the post-civil war south with all non-jews being niggers.
The real problem is these rabbis claim to have the support of about 1/3 of the soldiers in the IDF. Even if they are bragging they have a significant number. Which still might not be a problem if they were enlisted and evenly distributed among the troops. But the IDF has groups segregated by type of Jew -- these being one of the types -- and they have been at it long enough that they have members vertically in these groups from private to general. Thus entire divisions can go into combat who will follow their rabbis and kill women and children.
This is what was reported in the 2009 massacre in Gaza.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
- Login to post comments
Offline A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Caesar did not deal with rebellious Gauls.OK, repeat after me:
Very well documented history is not dealt with by saying what amounts to the schoolyard "Did not!".
Now write that out 500 times on the black board during recess or you will have to stay after school.
That is cute but not clever.
You should have noticed as I have this entire exchange has not had a single defender of Israel, Zionists or Jews either separately or in combination. It has been between what I say and others saying the Jews are no better than the Palestinians. This is not much of an exchange.
Additionally when I point out the legal basis which is totally devoid of religious contamination as opposed to saying both sides are religious basketcases, I get accused of saying "did not" instead of even the slightest attempt to address the real issues I have raised. Add to this a studied ignorance of the terms which are in fact applicable to the subject.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
- Login to post comments
Offline jcgadfly wrote:If you are going to claim they were not Jews Rotsa Ruck. If you are going to claim they did not steal the land then you will have to explain the necessity for that absentee owners laws. If neither of the above, what are you going to try to claim?A_Nony_Mouse wrote:jcgadfly wrote:A_Nony_Mouse wrote:...Which religion am I supporting? As you are also an atheist you also raionally exclude all religious sources and traditions and deal only with the physical evidence.
Please show me where I am doing other than that.
If anti-religion is not an axe we share then what are you doing here?
You didn't mention "supporting" religion. You said "find a source that doesn't have a religious axe to grind".
You have a religious axe to grind (because you are anti-Judaism to the exclusion of other batshit crazy religions). I don't have to hate religion to be against it. You seem to (at least for one).
Therefore, you have disqualified yourself as a source.
It would be like if I agreed to do an unbiased biography of you and then only talked to people who hated you.
Keep in mind I do not care what you think of me as a source.
We have been all over this. I think everyone will agree Judaism has not received its fair share of grief. However as I explained in a thread called something like "Strike the Root" Judaism is the foundation of both Christianity and Islam then the most bang for the buck is obtained from concentrating on Judaism. That discredits the religious preoccupation of some 2.5 billion people. I don't see anything else that is more productive for atheist efforts.
The larger picture is Muslims and Christians are eager to discredit each other but because of the foundation issue neither deals with Judaism. Of course Jews are not eager to fill the gap although those who declare they are both atheists and Jews (that is, either fake atheists or fake Jews) are eager to transform it into a modern ethical system which has no connection whatsoever to its origin.
That aside I have not made any religious consideration in my discussion. I have in fact removed the claims of ownership which for Jews is nothing but a religious claim and put it in real terms which is in fact a simple matter of deeded ownership of private property. The Islamic conquest of Palestine lead to the assertion of the right to rule, that is sovereignty, not the right of ownership. Thus the two cannot be equated. It is not a matter of competing but equivalent claims.
Trying to divert the discussion into religious terms is disingenuous.
Trying to divert the discussion into religious terms? You never left religion.
"The Jews stole the land. The owners want it back."
Quote:No one is perfect. They say they are.Your order of hatres:1. They're Jews.
2. They stole the land. (because of reason 1)
They're not just land-grabbing asses to you - they're JEWISH land grabbing asses.
So as soon as you get off religion - the rest of us will also.
Americans don't own the land we stand on - the government stole and continues to steal land (eminent domain). Do you have a problem with that or are they safe because it's a Christian nation?
Again you must some day learn the difference between sovereignty and ownership. They are completely different concepts.
I agree libertarians tend to look at eminent domain as theft but it is not a widely held position. The just compensation provision is what separates it from theft. The recent Supreme Court case in New London not withstanding the general principle.
You apparently have no idea what property ownership actually means either. My only alternative is to continue to talk passed you by using the proper meaning of these words. I can only hope you take the time to learn what the words actually mean.
Again, you use the term Zionist Jews because you believe the religion and the politics are inextricably linked. You have also said there are no non-Zionist Jews. I can say that they were land-grabbing asshats without having to bring the religion into it. You can't.
Why do you hold the fact that they call themselves Jews being a greater crime than land stealing?
it would not defeat the purpose of the website to say that land-grabbers are vermin. It does, however, trash your purpose to say that they're land grabbing vermin because they're Jews instead of looking at the other motivations behind it.
You are looking at land being taken though the owners have a legal deed in Palestine. I am looking at the exact same thing in America. Are the Palestinians' deeds more valid because you say they are? Oh and the "just compensation" is neither just nor compensation because it has jack to do with the real worth of the land. In the case of Israel and Palestine, all of the land is worthless.
Property rights have never been "We were here first". All I have are two wildly divergent stories - yours and Israel's. The truth is probably in the middle.
I should probably apologize for talking past you - let me try again. TWO LEGS BAD! FOUR LEGS GOOD! Is that better?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
I can't speak for A_nony_mouse, but from what I can tell he seems to claim that the Jews stole the land with blood and violence.
Seeing as I'm known for my objections to Israel, I'll clarify critisim of Israel from my perspective to help you understand why some people do critisize Israel.
I know for myself personally, I don't like the idea of Israel's track record on treat Arab civilians. Israel does have a right to defend itself against Hamas and PFLP, but they take their military power way too far and kill more civilians than terrorists. I don't hate Israel, I just hate their tactics and disregard for life. It's not about who gets what land, it's about how they treat civilians.
OK Pineapple,
Almost the entire planet consists of land that has been taken from the people who were there before with violence and bloodshed. Regarding Europe, Asia and Africa, they have all been taken from the people who were there before with violence and bloodshed many times over.
Seriously, I remember hearing a bit on the radio during Clinton's war in the former Yugoslavia where some guy was asserting that some scrap of land belonged to his people because they won it in a battle like 800 years ago.
My reaction to that was along the lines of “you dumb fuck! I don't care what happened 800 years ago, that land belong to whomever won it last (probably with violence and bloodshed)”.
On that point, Israel is no worse than most people and way the fuck better than Genghis Khan or Attila the Hun.
So let me ask, if you don't much care for what Israel is doing over there, do you have the same or worse feelings for Joe Stalin and Pol Pot?
=
What's your point? I'm not saying whether Israel is or isn't entiled to the land or whether they were right to take it, I'm saying their actions, not whether they should have the land is under moral question.
I think have worse feelings seeing as they killed far more people than Israel has to my knowledge.
I think I know where this question is going, as in Hamas kills Israeli civilians. But that still doesn't justify Israel killing innocent Palestinian or Lebanese civilians any more than the attacks in Iraq on America justify Americans killing Iraqi civilians.
Which brings me to my question to those that think Israel is acting morally:
Do you think America is justified in killing innocent Iraqi civilians? If America isn't justified in killing Iraqi civilians, then why is Israel justified in killing Arab civilians? If the 9/11 hijackers were Portuguese, would we be justified in killing Portuguese civilians?
I'm not saying every Israeli military member is ready to kill civilians with glee or that all those that serve in the IDF are morally corrupt, I'm saying that many of their actions of Israel are morally questionable.
oh and for the record, I think A_Nony_mouse's views towards Israel are rather extreme.
When you are in a war civilians die. It sucks, war sucks but if you prosecute a war and are unwilling to kill civilians you put yourself at a significant disadvantage. I think Israel has been remarkably careful because they are so concerned with the bad world press they receive every time they kill a few civilians. But remember, the enemy they are fighting does not follow the rules of the Geneva Convention. They don't wear uniforms, they intentionally target civilians and hide among civilians on their side so they can pretend to be all shocked when an Israeli bomb takes out a few civilians. Cheating is a great way to win a war and if you do not adapt you will lose.
Israel is fighting for their very existence. It is surrounded by countries that want to completely exterminate its people and a country with a leader that promised to wipe them off the map is getting close to having nuclear weapons. The only real ally Israel has in the world is the US and even that alliance is faltering. It is one thing if they go through towns systematically killing every Arab they run across but a handful of civilians that are killed because they were too close to terrorists or misidentified is simply an unfortunate consequence of war. If the Arabs don't like it they should crack down on the terrorists launching attacks against Israel instead of supporting them.
Name the war that has ever been won without killing civilians.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
Opinion:
I find it hard to condone the existence of a country who supplanted an existing population because they are under the impression that god gave them that land just because it says so in a 4000 year old book... If the Palestinians weren't such easy "villians" if they were, for example, a group of Christians living in what is now called israel, reast assured that the United States would have never backed it... Moreover, I believe the existence of israel to be the catalyst for much of the world's conflict... Perhaps not the actual cause, and I think that things would have eventually come to an international religious conflict anyway... But after 1948, the lines were clearly drawn...
Introducing one culture based on an irrational ideology to an unstable region based on another irrational ideology ... well... What'd anyone expect?...
www.RichWoodsBlog.com
True, but that tends to happen when people have their cities walled in, their kids murdered by military, and they have to be searched by an occupational force before they can even go to work.
Last time anyone tried that with my country, a war was started...
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
What you wrote in your second paragraph IS historicly acurate for that area; it happened in 1000 BCE, 890 BCE, 600 BCE, 168 BCE, 30 BCE, 4 BCE, 70 CE, 330 CE, 610 CE, 1095 CE, 1105 CE, etc. etc. etc. and meny times in between those dates I mentioned. I lost track of the number of times it was accurate since 70 CE. The simple truth is that not much has changed in Israel/Palistine area in the last 3000 years, except the uniforms. Our resident antisemite does not see much of anything beyond the word JEW. That hate mongering bastard can drop dead, eat shit and die for all I care. But what would we do without the hate filled shit headed bastard; live Rationally I suppose.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
You misread my post, then. And the first paragraph IS accurate for the West Bank.
Shut up, Kyle!
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Thanks for all the replies, guys and gals. *sighs* Im really wish A_Nony_Mouse would respond to my OP though.
Thanks.
"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci
I know you have not looked at any credible source of information. Everything from the Septuagint, aka Old Testament, or any religious tradition of any type is worthless.
Truth is there is neither historical nor archaeological evidence of any Israel prior to 1948. Obviously 62 years does not count as even a century much less plural millenia. Therefore you have not studied any credible source.
Evil is a religious term. I do not deal in religious concepts nor use them. I have recited facts and actions and have described them as criminal. I have not been presented with a refutation of my designation of facts and events as criminal.
I have also established the intent of Zionists to steal the land and drive out the native population as having been in publication since Jabotinsky's The Iron Wall in 1923. That very simply means all Zionists are both murderers and thieves by definition. One cannot be a Zionist and not be a murderer and a thief. I await refutation on this observation.
In pracitcal terms, if the Palestinians had not been driven out them the first election would have shitcanned the entire Zionist Enterprise. This is why Benny Morris, while having revealed the Zionist crimes, says theft and murder were good things because it was good for the Jews. It is people like that who give religion a bad name.
If you have been reading what I post then you know I have recited the real facts of 1948 and have given a list authors who are both jewish and Israeli who have used Israeli government records which support my description of events. They are contrary to the propaganda line put out by the Zionists.
Nothing to it. It is real simple.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.
Anything beyond that is no more than obfuscation.
The truth cannot be hate.
It has nothing to do with Arabs. It is the basic right of individuals to their private property. Jews stole it. The owners want it back. There is nothing more to say on the subject.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Then again, no one currently involved in the conflict has any standing for their position.
There are neither original thieves nor original owners.
Nobody has a dog in this fight - they're just killing for shits and giggles. It's like the Hatfields and the McCoys - it's been going on so long I don't think those involved really know why they're fighting - they've just grown up with it.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Which is quite true however it ain't over until its over and Palestinians are still fighting for the return of their private property. If you go back far enough most of these fights have ended in peace treaties or simply died out for lack of interest although some Anglo-Saxons still have a problem with the descendants of the french nobility who still have titles. The Irish took centuries before they managed to kick out the Brits. The Scots got their own Parliament about ten years ago and there is a movement to disolve the United Kingdom.
All that said the Palestinians have not ceased fighting to regain their private property. There are no peace treaties.
Additionally the use violence against the occupation is lawful in international law primarily due to the 4th Geneva Convention. It is also that convention which makes Israel's occupation unlawful and down right criminal in a dozen areas. Before WWII resistance to occupation was unlawful. The Convention retroactively legalized all the methods of the resitance movements in WWII.
Clinton can be excused very little but his justification for the war was that it was humanitarian, to end the treatment of the Kosovars. Funny thing but no evidence of any ill treatment of Kosovars has ever been produced. His reasons had nothing to do with the 800 year old claim.
Regarding France what is the difference between Hitler and Caesar? Rome was never thrown out.
What kind of defense is it to say the Zionists are no better than the greatest mass murderers in history? Stalin by body count and Pol Pot by fraction of the population that is.
I agree with you. Israel is no better than those two.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
It's on like Donkey Kong!
If there is such remarkable care regarding civilian casualties one has to ask how 9 were killed on the Freeom Flotilla with 5 by close range head shots. That is called confirming the kill in IDF jargon.
As to targeting civilians when members of the IDF hide among civilians that negates any protection civilians are afforded. Israel has universal military service. Any group larger than ten is statitically likely to have a member of the military among them. Certainly Sderot has many more than one members of the IDF living there.
As to an Israeli bomb taking out a few civilians, when a 1000 lb bomb is dropped on an apartment building in the middle of the night to murder one suspect it is clear the other 18 were murdered with depraved indifference to human life if not first degree murder. One wonders where this remarkable care went? As you know killing in occupied territory with a trial with the normal protections of law is murder according to the 4th Geneva Convention.
One has to ask after the dire threat to Israel when the Zionists wiped Palestine off of the map after it had been there for at least 2500 years. No one misses Palestine. Certainly no one will miss Israel.
And it does get a bit tiring to hear the BS reference to Palestinians as Arabs. They are people whose ancestors converted to Islam from Judaism.
For the record regarding Cast Lead in Gaza, Israel claims it killed only 1000 while Hamas claims 1400. This was in response to 1 (ONE) person killed in Sderot. If we split the difference we have 1200. When the Nazis murdered 1200 people in exchange for the murder of Heydrich the world declared that was an atrocity. Pardon if I consider Cast Lead an atrocity for the same exchange ratio.
We can look at Israel's expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians and see murder was the Zionist method to terrorize them into leaving. We know this from numerous authors both Israeli and Jewish who used Israeli government records.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
For the record there is no evidence the stories are more than 2100 years old and there is ample archaeological evidence the stories are pure fiction regarding people and kingdoms which never existed. The very few events which have some connection to real history are so different from the real events that they cannot be considered any different from an inspiration for fiction.
You are hardly alone. The 9-11 commission said the same thing.
Not only irrational but one openly based upon murder and theft to create their magical land should be the source of derision and contempt for all civilized people.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
There are many who like simple truths but religious traditions and stories in the Septuagint which cannot be traced to older than the 1st c. BC and for which there is no physical evidence whatsoever, are not a basis for anything but religion. They are not suitable for rational people.
There is record of Palestine in Herodotus. There is no historical record of any Israel prior to 1948. There is no archaeological record of any biblical Israel, period.
I remind you this is supposed to be a rational forum. If people choose to profess the Mosaic confession then that is their choice. If that gets them killed it is their choice. Rational people have no sympathies for any members of any religion. Jews, sun worshippers, snake handlers are all the same and equally stupid. And ritual genital mutilation was a very primitive thing to do even in Roman times and was universally condemned by them and the Greeks. But they fought two wars against the Romans for the right to mutilate the genitalia of infants. One need not have a high horse to be disgusted by that practice.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Please. The Palestinians have ownership to private property stolen from them under color of law by Jews. The laws were called absentee owner laws. If absent long enough the land reverts to state ownership. That anyone attempting to return to their land was murdered by Jews is what makes it color of law. That it also applied to Palestinians who stayed but were forced into ghettos were also murdered if they tried to return. Again, theft under color of law enforced by summary execution, aka murder by Jews. These are facts which are not disputable.
Izziehuggers are always trying to make this look like something strange when it is really no more than fee simple ownership of land and appertinances to the land, in English, homes and other improvements.
The entire damned absentee owner license to murder laws would not have been needed if anything else were the case.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Your claim rests on the fact that the Jews stole the land starting in 1948 and the owners of said land in 1948 want it back.
I doubt if any of those people are alive and if they are alive, they can't do too much about it.
In the present day, they're fighting over territory that neither can legally claim. They either don't know that or don't give a damn. When someone produces a deed from 1948 saying what they own, you'll have a case. Right now they're just killing in the name of their gods.
Would it be less of a problem if the Palestinians were kicking Israeli ass? Would you speak on the tragic waste of life or be cheering the Palestinians on?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Let me try it this way. There is no absolute standard of justice in this world. However there are standards that people demand for themselves. Given that is the case there is a standard of justice that Jews demand for themselves regarding matters from WWII.
I propose the proper standard of justice for the Palestinians is the same as Jews demand for themselves.
That standard includes the right of inheritance from deceased ancestors.
Are there any other questions?
I agree the Jews are fighting in the name of their blood-thirsty god who demands ritual genital mutilation as well as a ritual/taboo life style which does not pass as a religion these days.
I have no idea why anyone here who is by definition an atheist to be posting here has any partiality to any particular religionists. But that does appear to be the case by the incredibly vehement response I receive. One would almost suspect you folks are not atheists but closet Jews. That is improper participation here.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
1. That helps - thanks. I'm not exactly sure if you propose the same standard as you seem to be a fan of eradicating the Jews living in Israel/Palestine/that piece of dirt even if there were peace.
2. Both gods are bloodthirsty.
4. Wasn't talking about religion. I aimed the question at you personally. Would you be happier if the side you support was winning? Would we be hearing about Palestinian atrocities being terrible if they were winning? would there be such things as Palestinian atrocities if they were winning?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
It is a rather ancient canard to talk about eradicating when in fact that was the intention of the Zionists towards the Palestinians. Should it happen there will be no greater loss than the loss of Palestine.
As to peace in that land it is nothing more than Zionist propaganda which holds the region was always at war internally as externally is meaningless to the land itself. All violence in the region after the Romans explained to the priest-kings of Judea that continued wars to impose their Yahweh cult were over have always been external.
As to eradicating Jews in the land, it is an idea used to scare children but should it happen as it happened to the Palestinians then we know from history no one will care about the Jews any more than they care about the Palestinians.
As atheists we can say a lot of things but culturally and historically they are the same god for the Muslims and Jews while the Christians have the rewrite in the form of Jesus. Any rational person sees Islam and Judaism are much closer to each other than either is to Christianity. Not to say Jesus is not bloodthirsty but Christianity puts on a better front than the other two -- more hypocritical if you wish.
I only deal with the facts in evidence. It has nothing to do with who is doing what to whom. I would not consider holding Israel to any standard at all if it had refused to join the UN and had refused to sign the 4th Geneva Convention -- not that I can find a difference between what it does and with or without those.
And yes, you were talking about religion. If we are talking Jews then we are talking about followers of Judaism, people of the Mosaic confession. If a person does not follow Judaism I am not required to go along with their pious fiction that they are Jews. An atheist cannot be a Jew by Torah definition of Jew. An atheist cannot accept the Torah and be an atheist.
Therefore I know you are not a Jew. So I ask why the defense of the political Zionist movement based upon acceptance of the Torah? That is not something one expects of an atheist.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Hey Mr. Mouse.... Not sure if you've seen *this* delightful little video titled "How To Kill Goyim And Influence People -- Torat Ha'melech":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t_LxpCY2G8&feature=player_embedded
www.RichWoodsBlog.com
Again, thanks.
What happened to three. I don't know. Fingers and brain sometimes work independently.
As for the rest, I'd like you to make up your mind on who you're talking about - Jews, Zionists or Israelis. They're not all the same animal.
Oh, and thanks again for the unwitting honesty in your dodge. If you were dealing with the facts in evidence you'd admit that atrocities have been committed on both sides. Since you claim Palestinians are pure as the driven snow in this matter, I have to accept that even if there were peace (unlikely, agreed) you would be completely against it.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Israel does not have separation of church and state. The state and Judaism are the same which is why it insists upon being called a jewish state. The state also considers itself to be the the Zionist enterprise.
Therefore there is no distinction to be made. The most one might do is absolve the non-jewish Israelis of the crimes of jewish, zionist Israel.
The facts in evidence include the lawful right to use deadly force to resist an unlawful military occupation. Therefore only the jewish, zionist Israelis can be considered at fault.
In all cases there is a moral imperative to use deadly force in efforts to regain personal property from thieves. This is only mitigated when there is recourse to a higher power to force the return of what has been stolen. The jewish, zionist Israelis refuse to return what they have stolen to its rightful owners and there is no higher power to force them to do so. Therefore deadly force is to be expected. In this case it is an additional crime to use deadly force to retain what has been stolen.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
If you get excited about what kids do you give them what they want.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Indeed. Nothing is over until the parties stop bitching over the deal. In fact, I don't think that this one is going to end for a very long time. Hell's bells but both sides have had a dog in the fight since Rome blasted the holy land about what, 1900 years ago... (note that I don't give a crap who had the land before that. Personally, I doubt that either culture can be much older than that and the ancient people from who they claim roots would not recognize either of the modern cultures as their own).
As far as matters of current international law, remember that the same bunch of scoundrels who put the honus on the Israeli people to behave a certain way also gave them the land through a quasi legal back room deal in the first place.
Well, that was not intended as a comment on Clinton's war, apart from making the point that Clinton had a war (three actually but regarding that one in particular). It does bug me though that a president can get a pass on presiding over an armed international conflict that featured atrocities, genocide and American soldiers dieing in a foreign land for no national interest whatever.
Rather, my intention was to observe the fact that the 800 year old claim was spurious. I suppose that I could spin off an example of some future scenario where Israel really does come out on top. Then add to the mix some future ethnically palestinian people who have not lived in the area for some generations.
Under international law as it stands today, would that reverse the situation? Basically, that these people from wherever want to come in and take the land away from the people who have been there with no conflict for several generations?
You don't have to answer that if you don't want to. AFAIAC, they are all scoundrels and there is blame enough to spread around.
Granted. Also, during Roman times, there was no concept of international law or wartime atrocities. If memory serves, Julius Caesar dealt with several thousand rebellious Gauls by cutting both hands off at the wrist and leaving them to deal with the matter. Only a fool would try to claim that because they were left alive, that was in some way “better than genocide”.
Did I say that it was a defense?
Realistically, every US president talks the talk about bringing peace to the middle east. However, there will never be peace in the region as long as there are substantial numbers of people with competing claims to the area.
The Jews have a nation that was created for them under international law. The basis that they somehow have a right to be there that transcends international law is bullshit. However, if we are going to use the term international law as a magic word to justify an opinion, the Jews do have a valid claim.
The Palestinians for the most part don't care about international law. The land has been theirs since the fall of Rome. That being said, I would assume that the political news shows on Sunday morning probably have their share of Palestinian commentators who expound on the fourth Geneva convention. Even so, that is just another damn smoke screen for the idea that nobody can own anything that they feel like owning.
=
Is there really a personal property question on land that neither side can prove conclusively they have rights to (except for what their particular version of god says)?
Any direct Canaanites around? Palestinians claim ancestry to them but there is no prove other than their word.
Sounds like two groups of armed squatters to me.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
I am talking about land to which the Palestinian owners held and still hold legal title. It is the jewish, zionist Israelis who like to invoke divinely ordained ownership as recorded in some stories they wrote -- surprise, surprise.
Pardon if I take deeded property over some stories of unknown origin, written by unknown people for unknown reasons.
So far as the historical and archaeological evidence goes "canaanites" are a ficticious people invented by the folks who invented the bible stories. These "canaanites" are in the same category as "israelites" and the Munchkins and the Brobdinabians.
For a fact the Palestinians trace their origins to the Palestinians mentioned by Herodotus in the 5th c. BC. As the Judeans do not appear in history until 67BC the Palestinians have been around centuries longer than the Judeans.
Sounds like you have no idea whatsoever about the known history of the region and its peoples.
I can only suggest you look into it using impartial sources which means people with absolutely no religious ax to grind nor religious orientation. This means only sources which present the physical evidence and do not weave bible stories around the evidence. The evidence is what it is and must be interperated without any reference at all to a collection of fiction that first appears in history in the 1st c. BC. There is no evidence the stories are any older than that and they first appear in Greek.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Signature ? How ?
No religious axe to grind? That lets you out as a source, doesn't it?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Rome put down two revolts by people who were fighting for the right to mutilate the genitalia of infans so lets not be to hard on them. And no one was expelled from the land. That myth never ends. Many left voluntarily and most converted to Islam centuries later.
No land was given, period. The land was not the UN's to give. The only thing "given" was the right to rule the land contingent upon the return of the refugees. Sovereignty is not ownership. It is a favorite zionist propaganda line to confuse the two. This is not to suggest Zionists are not a very confused people.
Except the facts are the atrocities and genocide were found to be nothing more than war propaganda so it is only a lesson on the effectiveness of propaganda. Think Bush and Iraq for another example.
I have never argued ancestral claims and such nonsense. The ownership claims of the Palestinians are to deeded, titled land ownership. It has nothing to do with sovereignty. Jews used the color of law under the absentee owners laws to confiscate the land from the refugees. There would have been no need for this travesty of justice if in fact the refugees had not owned the land. If a person tries to return and not be absent the Jews would murder him. That is color of law. That also applied to Palestinians who managed to stay and were forced into ghettos in Israel. If they were outside their ghettos after curfew they were murdered by Jews. Trying not to be absent carried a death penalty so the "laws" were 100% successful.
The standard of justice for the Palestinians is the same standard that Israel demands for Jews for the events before and during WWII.
The people who are living there now are living on stolen property. They know that. They knew that when they chose to live there. They do not have clean hands. They cannot be considered innocent owners but rather only holders of stolen property.
Tell me why you see no problem with people who lived on the land for centuries being kicked out but europeans who showed up a few years ago should not be disturbed. I must be missing something here.
As far as I can see and can read the criminal intention to kill or expel the Palesitnians and steal their private property has been in publication since 1923 with Jabotinsky's Iron Wall. So far as I can tell the only thing Palestinians ever did was try to resist the murder, theft and ethnic cleansing. Finding fault with the Palestinians is like criticizing a woman for harming her rapist.
Caesar did not deal with rebellious Gauls. He conquered them for the first time. But as you agree the conquest and occupation were essentially the same for both Caesar and Hitler why is there such a big difference in how they are regarded?
Then what was it?
All the US gov wants is political contributions from rich Jews. Israel would have disappeared decades ago without US money, weapons and diplomatic protection. There is no US interest in the continued existence of Israel.
You need to learn that there is a difference between sovereignty and what that difference means and how it applies to this situation. Until you do that you cannot intelligently discuss the subject.
No more than ours I am sure.
The Palestinians have been there since before Rome fought the Punic Wars. During the Roman period they called themselves Galileans, Judeans, Iodumeans and Samarians amonng others names. After the rise of Christianity the Judeans, aka Jews, converted to Christianity and later most of them to Islam.
You are trying to make a distinction between Palestinians who remained Jews and those who converted to other religions and claiming there is a difference in rights based solely upon the professed religion in the past and in the present.
While we know religious folks do such things, WE do not.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Which religion am I supporting? As you are also an atheist you also raionally exclude all religious sources and traditions and deal only with the physical evidence.
Please show me where I am doing other than that.
If anti-religion is not an axe we share then what are you doing here?
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
You didn't mention "supporting" religion. You said "find a source that doesn't have a religious axe to grind".
You have a religious axe to grind (because you are anti-Judaism to the exclusion of other batshit crazy religions). I don't have to hate religion to be against it. You seem to (at least for one).
Therefore, you have disqualified yourself as a source.
It would be like if I agreed to do an unbiased biography of you and then only talked to people who hated you.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Keep in mind I do not care what you think of me as a source.
We have been all over this. I think everyone will agree Judaism has not received its fair share of grief. However as I explained in a thread called something like "Strike the Root" Judaism is the foundation of both Christianity and Islam then the most bang for the buck is obtained from concentrating on Judaism. That discredits the religious preoccupation of some 2.5 billion people. I don't see anything else that is more productive for atheist efforts.
The larger picture is Muslims and Christians are eager to discredit each other but because of the foundation issue neither deals with Judaism. Of course Jews are not eager to fill the gap although those who declare they are both atheists and Jews (that is, either fake atheists or fake Jews) are eager to transform it into a modern ethical system which has no connection whatsoever to its origin.
That aside I have not made any religious consideration in my discussion. I have in fact removed the claims of ownership which for Jews is nothing but a religious claim and put it in real terms which is in fact a simple matter of deeded ownership of private property. The Islamic conquest of Palestine lead to the assertion of the right to rule, that is sovereignty, not the right of ownership. Thus the two cannot be equated. It is not a matter of competing but equivalent claims.
Trying to divert the discussion into religious terms is disingenuous.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Trying to divert the discussion into religious terms? You never left religion.
"The Jews stole the land. The owners want it back."
Your order of hatres:
1. They're Jews.
2. They stole the land. (because of reason 1)
They're not just land-grabbing asses to you - they're JEWISH land grabbing asses.
So as soon as you get off religion - the rest of us will also.
Americans don't own the land we stand on - the government stole and continues to steal land (eminent domain). Do you have a problem with that or are they safe because it's a Christian nation?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Again you must some day learn the difference between sovereignty and ownership. They are completely different concepts.
I agree libertarians tend to look at eminent domain as theft but it is not a widely held position. The just compensation provision is what separates it from theft. The recent Supreme Court case in New London not withstanding the general principle.
You apparently have no idea what property ownership actually means either. My only alternative is to continue to talk passed you by using the proper meaning of these words. I can only hope you take the time to learn what the words actually mean.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml