Israel to Expand Settlements in West Bank

gs, just out of curiosity, how would you feel if someone came into your home and claimed it as their own? What if they told you, get out, this is our home now? Would you be angry, or would you accept it and leave? Not a personal attack, just curiosity, because in many ways this is what has happenned with the Palestinians. So what would your reaction be?

Weezer, you couldn't be farther from the truth.

There is no such thing as a palestinian to begin with.

In Judea and Samaria, two provinces of Israel, most of the Arabs living there are Jordanian Arabs who moved there during the illegal invasion and occupation between 1949 and 1967.

What about all the Jews expelled from the Arab countries in 1948, they recieved zero compensation for any of their goods and property, all of which was siezed from them by the arab states?

The bottom line is that you are full or moslem propaganda that is daily spoon fed to your generation.
 
Weezer, you couldn't be farther from the truth.

There is no such thing as a palestinian to begin with.

In Judea and Samaria, two provinces of Israel, most of the Arabs living there are Jordanian Arabs who moved there during the illegal invasion and occupation between 1949 and 1967.

What about all the Jews expelled from the Arab countries in 1948, they recieved zero compensation for any of their goods and property, all of which was siezed from them by the arab states?

The bottom line is that you are full or moslem propaganda that is daily spoon fed to your generation.

The bottom line is that there had been nomadic Arabs (Palestinians) living off the land in Judea and Samaria for thousands of years; they were relegated to a sedentary life in a confined area a few generations ago.

One might as well say that nobody took land away from the Sioux and Comanche simply because they were transient.
 
Weezer, you couldn't be farther from the truth.

There is no such thing as a palestinian to begin with.

In Judea and Samaria, two provinces of Israel, most of the Arabs living there are Jordanian Arabs who moved there during the illegal invasion and occupation between 1949 and 1967.

What about all the Jews expelled from the Arab countries in 1948, they recieved zero compensation for any of their goods and property, all of which was siezed from them by the arab states?

The bottom line is that you are full or moslem propaganda that is daily spoon fed to your generation.

Several years back, I read an article where a Muslim family went to visit family in a neighboring village. When they returned from their visit, they found a Jewish family had moved into their home. They contacted authorities who refused to make the Jewish family vacate the premises.

If this happenned to you, what would your response be?

Are you arguing two wrongs make a right? I know the Jews have faced atrocities, but are you arguing that it allows them to commit atrocities in return? That kind of thinking will never allow progression.

As for your bottom line, gs, most of my life I was fed propaganda on why I should hate Muslims. Most propaganda even today supports that notion. You can't talk about 9/11 without hearing Muslim terrorists. The news consistently reports on Muslim suicide bombings when they occur. Rarely do I see anything in favor to Muslims. They use the extremists to reflect the entire culture. I don't agree with that. Contrary to most stereotypes, there are some Muslims who simply want to live in peace.

Based on your posts, I'm curious as to how old you are? You don't have to answer if you don't want, but I find viewpoints tend to be effected by age in many instances.(Not all) FTR, I'm 38. Wouldn't ask a question to which I wouldn't reply.
 
Several years back, I read an article where a Muslim family went to visit family in a neighboring village. When they returned from their visit, they found a Jewish family had moved into their home. They contacted authorities who refused to make the Jewish family vacate the premises.

If this happenned to you, what would your response be?

Are you arguing two wrongs make a right? I know the Jews have faced atrocities, but are you arguing that it allows them to commit atrocities in return? That kind of thinking will never allow progression.

As for your bottom line, gs, most of my life I was fed propaganda on why I should hate Muslims. Most propaganda even today supports that notion. You can't talk about 9/11 without hearing Muslim terrorists. The news consistently reports on Muslim suicide bombings when they occur. Rarely do I see anything in favor to Muslims. They use the extremists to reflect the entire culture. I don't agree with that. Contrary to most stereotypes, there are some Muslims who simply want to live in peace.

Based on your posts, I'm curious as to how old you are? You don't have to answer if you don't want, but I find viewpoints tend to be effected by age in many instances.(Not all) FTR, I'm 38. Wouldn't ask a question to which I wouldn't reply.

I doubt that story about the stolen house is true.

Just what kind of atrocities are you accusing the Jews of doing?

Last week 168 rockets landed in Israel. Did you see that reported anywhere? What if Seatle were being bombed from Vancouver, Detroit from accorss the river in Canada or Miami from Havanna or San Diego from Tijuana? Would that be news? But it happens to Israel every day and everyone ignores it.

What if your kids were in a kindergarten playground and they had to dodge rocket explosives every day.

Screw a bunch of propaganda, the truth is damming enough.

For instance I know an Arab Christian who lives in Bethlehem.

He nor any other Christian can put a cross on their door or in their window as is traditional.

They can't put a candle in the window on Christian holidays as is traditional.

Know why, if they do then their home or business will be broken into and they will be beaten, if they repeat the offence they will be killed and their home or business burnt to the ground.

They can't let their children out on the street without accompanying them or they will be beaten or raped or worse. And he says it gets worse every year.

This he told me face to face, do you think he was making that up?

I'll be 70 my next.

BTW, when Jordan occupied Judea, Samaria and east Jerusalem for nineteen years, they desecrated Jewish and Christian tombs and homes.

Just as they are doing in Kosovo where they have destroyed over 200 churches including cemeteries.

They are doing now anywhere they can just as they did 1,400 years ago in Arabia.






therealUT
The bottom line is that there had been nomadic Arabs (Palestinians) living off the land in Judea and Samaria for thousands of years; they were relegated to a sedentary life in a confined area a few generations ago.

Those are so few in number as to be meaningless.

And if they want to keep on traveling why don't they travel back to Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Jordan or where ever they came from?

At any rate there are very few truly nomadic people left on Earth anywhere.

99.9% of the Arabs in Judea and Samaria came either after the Jews started to migrate to Israel or during the illegal 19 year Arab occupation.
 
Those are so few in number as to be meaningless.

I doubt it was meaningless for the families that were evicted.

And if they want to keep on traveling why don't they travel back to Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Jordan or where ever they came from?

Nomadic migratory patterns existed for a reason (nomads follow the land that will best sustain their herds).

At any rate there are very few truly nomadic people left on Earth anywhere.

It is tough to be nomadic when land continues to be consumed.

99.9% of the Arabs in Judea and Samaria came either after the Jews started to migrate to Israel or during the illegal 19 year Arab occupation.

99.9% of the Jews who were killed in the Holocaust were spies who were caught committing acts of espionage against the Wiemar Republic. Statistics, I can make them up as well.
 
I doubt that story about the stolen house is true.

Why? Because it goes against what you choose to believe? Jews cannot commit crimes themselves? Are they somehow perfect?

Just what kind of atrocities are you accusing the Jews of doing?

Just as innocent Jews are caught in the crossfire, so are innocent Muslims. Both sides have blood on their hands. There is more than enough guilt to be shared.

Last week 168 rockets landed in Israel. Did you see that reported anywhere? What if Seatle were being bombed from Vancouver, Detroit from accorss the river in Canada or Miami from Havanna or San Diego from Tijuana? Would that be news? But it happens to Israel every day and everyone ignores it.

How is it ignored? I see on the news quite frequently where Israel has faced missile attacks or another suicide bomber has struck. Do they talk about the numbers? Not so much, but they do talk about it happenning. How often do you hear about the Israeli govt attacking Muslims protesting peacefully? Not very, but guess what, it happens. The Israeli govt is not interested in what they have to say. All they truly want is to drive them completely out of Israel.

What if your kids were in a kindergarten playground and they had to dodge rocket explosives every day.

Kids on both sides have been killed. Are Muslim children less valuable than Jewish children. I agree it is a tragic situation, but it isn't one sided as you would make it appear.

Screw a bunch of propaganda, the truth is damming enough.

Propaganda is spread by both sides. Again, not a one sided issue. If you're going to damn one, damn both. If it's wrong for one side, it's wrong for both. To say otherwise is hypocritical.

For instance I know an Arab Christian who lives in Bethlehem.

He nor any other Christian can put a cross on their door or in their window as is traditional.

They can't put a candle in the window on Christian holidays as is traditional.

Know why, if they do then their home or business will be broken into and they will be beaten, if they repeat the offence they will be killed and their home or business burnt to the ground.

They can't let their children out on the street without accompanying them or they will be beaten or raped or worse. And he says it gets worse every year.

This he told me face to face, do you think he was making that up?

Not saying he made it up, but if I use your logic, he should just move. That's what you claim the Muslims should do so why hold your friend to a different standard. (FTR, I'm sorry he faces those problems)

I'll be 70 my next.

My dad's close to that. His thinking has crystalized and he cannot fathom non-Christians or non-Jews being anything but evil. As a Christian, he's convinced that he's right, and because the Jews are "God's chosen", we must protect them(Despite all evidence they can protect themselves). In his opinion, if you are not one or the other, you're going to hell. Me, I believe in tolerance. I believe some people are good and some people are bad, and religion doesn't necessarily play a role in it. Crazies exist everywhere.

BTW, when Jordan occupied Judea, Samaria and east Jerusalem for nineteen years, they desecrated Jewish and Christian tombs and homes.

If Israel controlled all of Jerusalem, what do you believe is the first thing they would do? Me, I think they would destroy the Dome of the Rock. Now, according to past arguements you have submitted, you would be okay with that. So please tell me, why would it be acceptable for Jews to destroy Islamic holy sites, yet not okay for Muslims to destroy the holy sites of religions not their own? My take, I believe done by either side is wrong, but you seem to make excuses for poor behavior by the Jews while condemning the Muslims. Again, it appears hypocritical.

Just as they are doing in Kosovo where they have destroyed over 200 churches including cemeteries.

They are doing now anywhere they can just as they did 1,400 years ago in Arabia.

Sadly, history has shown to the victors go the spoils. Do I agree with it? Absolutely not, but it is a practice common to all cultures. They destroy what was to create what they want. They spread their belief systems, much like Christians spread the "Word" to the New World and the pagan savages who dared believe in their own gods. Conversion is a common religious practice as mankind finds itself wanting to "save souls".

I'm not arguing Muslims are great or that they're right or that their violence is justified. My arguement is in believing that they are the only ones doing wrong. It's simply not true. Both sides are guilty. To say otherwise shows a willingness to blind yourself to truth. Muslim extremists are wrong and deserve to be punished, but the Jews should live by the same standards. All I'm pushing is equality.







Those are so few in number as to be meaningless.

And if they want to keep on traveling why don't they travel back to Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Jordan or where ever they came from?

At any rate there are very few truly nomadic people left on Earth anywhere.

99.9% of the Arabs in Judea and Samaria came either after the Jews started to migrate to Israel or during the illegal 19 year Arab occupation.

.
 
.
Why?

Because of taqqiya and kitman.

Because it goes against what you choose to believe?

No, because it goes against the rule of law imposed by Israeli authorities in Judea and Samaria.

More often than not when a Jew buys property in Judea and Samaria and builds then another Arab steps forward and claims to own the land (without any documentation) and the Israeli authorities tear the Jewish home down.

In Arab moslem held territories in Israel it is a death penalty offence for an Arab to sell land to a Jew and that is imposed through sharia courts.


Jews cannot commit crimes themselves? Are they somehow perfect?

No and no.

Just as innocent Jews are caught in the crossfire, so are innocent Muslims. Both sides have blood on their hands. There is more than enough guilt to be shared.

But only one side is attempting to eradicate the other from the face of the Earth or at least from the country of Israel.

How is it ignored? I see on the news quite frequently where Israel has faced missile attacks or another suicide bomber has struck. Do they talk about the numbers? Not so much, but they do talk about it happenning. How often do you hear about the Israeli govt attacking Muslims protesting peacefully? Not very, but guess what, it happens. The Israeli govt is not interested in what they have to say. All they truly want is to drive them completely out of Israel.

I would say you are rather naive on the topic.

What news broadcast do you watch, I've never seen one TV news program mention the constant rocket attacks on Israel?

Kids on both sides have been killed. Are Muslim children less valuable than Jewish children. I agree it is a tragic situation, but it isn't one sided as you would make it appear.

I will say this for the Israelis, at least they don't use their children as human shields the way the cowardly moslems do.

Propaganda is spread by both sides. Again, not a one sided issue. If you're going to damn one, damn both. If it's wrong for one side, it's wrong for both. To say otherwise is hypocritical.

I'll agree to disagree with you on this as long as I don't have to carry a 'hypoctire sign around my neck, if that is your argument then my argument is that it is you who is the hypocrite.

Not saying he made it up, but if I use your logic, he should just move. That's what you claim the Muslims should do so why hold your friend to a different standard. (FTR, I'm sorry he faces those problems)

When did I reccomend that anyone 'just move?'

My dad's close to that. His thinking has crystalized and he cannot fathom non-Christians or non-Jews being anything but evil. As a Christian, he's convinced that he's right, and because the Jews are "God's chosen", we must protect them(Despite all evidence they can protect themselves). In his opinion, if you are not one or the other, you're going to hell. Me, I believe in tolerance. I believe some people are good and some people are bad, and religion doesn't necessarily play a role in it. Crazies exist everywhere.

When you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.
Your dad is probably a lot smarter than you give him credit for and your basic flaw of logic is that more often than not you jump to hasty conclusions based on what you think rather than analysing the situations and circumstances in debth.

Want tolerance, go to Bethlehem and preach tolerance for Christians and Jews to the moslems and see what that gets you. You say crazies exist everywhere, you might just look inside your own head and find some craziness.


If Israel controlled all of Jerusalem, what do you believe is the first thing they would do? Me, I think they would destroy the Dome of the Rock. Now, according to past arguements you have submitted, you would be okay with that. So please tell me, why would it be acceptable for Jews to destroy Islamic holy sites, yet not okay for Muslims to destroy the holy sites of religions not their own? My take, I believe done by either side is wrong, but you seem to make excuses for poor behavior by the Jews while condemning the Muslims. Again, it appears hypocritical.


Israel does control Jerusalem and they havn't made any move to destroy either of the mosques there.

You are basing your argument on a theory and ignoring history and I'm the damned hypocrite? Yeah right!


Sadly, history has shown to the victors go the spoils. Do I agree with it? Absolutely not, but it is a practice common to all cultures. They destroy what was to create what they want. They spread their belief systems, much like Christians spread the "Word" to the New World and the pagan savages who dared believe in their own gods. Conversion is a common religious practice as mankind finds itself wanting to "save souls".

Do you not see a huge difference between conversion by the sword and conversion by faith?




I'm not arguing Muslims are great or that they're right or that their violence is justified. My arguement is in believing that they are the only ones doing wrong. It's simply not true. Both sides are guilty. To say otherwise shows a willingness to blind yourself to truth. Muslim extremists are wrong and deserve to be punished, but the Jews should live by the same standards. All I'm pushing is equality.

More stupid BS!

OK, what is your plan to make things equal?

The Israelis forcefully evicted Jews from Gaza, an area they had every right in which to live, far more than those Arabs who came from Egypt during the occupation.

They left hot houses that the Arabs could have used to produce and prosper, what did the Arabs do, they tore down the hot houses and used, and continue to use, the concrete slabs as launch pads for rockets toward Israelis towns.


Of course they often build a playground nearby so if there is any retaliation they can accuse the Israelis of attacking children.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...-stone-christians-in-dearborn-michigan-video/

A Muslim mob shouting “Allahu Akbar!” erupts and stones Christians in Dearborn injuring the protesters. The mob threw stones, trash and crates at the Christian demonstrators.
 
gs, when all you look for is hate, that's all you're going to find. You are an exasperating person. You are so set in your convictions, and so convinced you are right and that anyone who speaks differently is wrong. I didn't say you were a hypocrite, I pointed out where certain standards conflicted and would create an air of hypocrisy. There is a big difference between the two. I don't know all of the logic you base your arguements on, so I cannot call you a hypocrite. I can point out where having standards for two different sets of people comes across as hypocritical. If that offends you, I apologize, but it doesn't change how I feel.

The just move comes from you continuing to say the Arabs should return to the lands they migrated from.

I don't believe my dad is stupid. If that's what you took from my comments, you misread. My point is, that like you, he has formed definitive conclusions that do not allow for change. I don't find that stupid, I find it extremely narrow-minded. Sorry if that offends. As for my own thinking, if anything, I'm over-analytical. I try to look at every angle of an arguement that I can. Whether it suits what I want to believe or not, I try to understand where other arguements could be made. I'm always open to the idea I could be wrong, I just ask you use unbiased logic to sway me.

As for crazy, yes, I freely admit I have more than my fairshare in my head. I suffer from mental diseases and freely admit them. I'm manic depressive, slightly OCD, slightly paranoid. I even had a psychologist suggest I bordered on schizophrenia. I am all kinds of crazy which is why I take my meds. So what does that say when a crazy person finds some of your arguements crazy? Volumes.
 
I doubt it was meaningless for the families that were evicted.



Nomadic migratory patterns existed for a reason (nomads follow the land that will best sustain their herds).



It is tough to be nomadic when land continues to be consumed.



99.9% of the Jews who were killed in the Holocaust were spies who were caught committing acts of espionage against the Wiemar Republic. Statistics, I can make them up as well.

What families were evicted and just when?

It's been generations since there was any appreciable amount of nomadic herdsmen in that area, get serious.

I've noticed you make things up habitually, and then throw in huge nonsequiturs.

Instead of arguing the number of traditionally nomadic Arabs in the area you start talking about Jews in Nazi Germany.

A very revealing nonsequitur to say the least.
 
Weezer
gs, when all you look for is hate, that's all you're going to find. You are an exasperating person. You are so set in your convictions, and so convinced you are right and that anyone who speaks differently is wrong. I didn't say you were a hypocrite, I pointed out where certain standards conflicted and would create an air of hypocrisy. There is a big difference between the two. I don't know all of the logic you base your arguements on, so I cannot call you a hypocrite. I can point out where having standards for two different sets of people comes across as hypocritical. If that offends you, I apologize, but it doesn't change how I feel.

The just move comes from you continuing to say the Arabs should return to the lands they migrated from.

I don't believe my dad is stupid. If that's what you took from my comments, you misread. My point is, that like you, he has formed definitive conclusions that do not allow for change. I don't find that stupid, I find it extremely narrow-minded. Sorry if that offends. As for my own thinking, if anything, I'm over-analytical. I try to look at every angle of an arguement that I can. Whether it suits what I want to believe or not, I try to understand where other arguements could be made. I'm always open to the idea I could be wrong, I just ask you use unbiased logic to sway me.

As for crazy, yes, I freely admit I have more than my fairshare in my head. I suffer from mental diseases and freely admit them. I'm manic depressive, slightly OCD, slightly paranoid. I even had a psychologist suggest I bordered on schizophrenia. I am all kinds of crazy which is why I take my meds. So what does that say when a crazy person finds some of your arguements crazy? Volumes.

What you find as narrow minded I find as a dispatc h from an unrealistic la la land.

I'll be glad to change my mind when the habitual aggressors change their actions as well as their rhetoric such as: "Allah willing Jerusalem will soon be our capitol."

What they mean by that is that islam will rule the world through it's caliph and everyone will be subject to the edicts of the vile, viscious and barbaric laws of islam.

That goes for the leaders, now what if there was an appreciable drop in percentage from the 86% of moslems that believe that anyone who leaves islam should be put to death?

Again I would moderate my opinion.

The Arabs going back where they came from makes far more sense and is far more humanitarian than their present campaign of eliminating all Jews, would you not at least agree to that?

What does it say when a crazy person says my argument is crazy?

To me it confirms that they are indeed crazy! :)
 
What families were evicted and just when?

1948 the areas of Katamon and Malha were cleared out by Jewish revolutionary forces and resettled by Jewish families. Previously, those areas were populated with Christian and Muslim Arabs. Further, most of the nomads were confined to 'settlements' at that time (much like our own Indian reservations).

It's been generations since there was any appreciable amount of nomadic herdsmen in that area, get serious.

There are still over 50,000 Arab Bedouins on 'settlements' in Israel; there are tens of thousands more who have been confined to 'Palestine' and Gaza.

I've noticed you make things up habitually, and then throw in huge nonsequiturs.

Like Aristotle quotes?

Instead of arguing the number of traditionally nomadic Arabs in the area you start talking about Jews in Nazi Germany.

Yes, that is what I was doing...
 
gs, I think I may have found your long lost Muslim twin.

ZIONIST ISRAEL’S CRIMES ARE NOT NEW « Muslim in Suffer


Make sure to read on down into the comments section. This guy is just as adamant as you, just from the reverse standpoint.

And no, I don't share his views. As I've said before, both sides have guilt. You continue to argue the Jews are justified. This guy argues the Muslims are justified. I do not see attrocities from either side as justified. I'm not convinced the leadership from either side wants peace, and while they bicker back and forth, innocents on both sides suffer. I want to believe given the choice much of the general populace would live in peace, but governments don't want that. Conflict is how they maintain control.
 
Damn! GS be old as fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu----

I doubt you will live so long, not without a major attitude adjustment.





1. 1948 the areas of Katamon and Malha were cleared out by Jewish revolutionary forces and resettled by Jewish families. Previously, those areas were populated with Christian and Muslim Arabs. Further, most of the nomads were confined to 'settlements' at that time (much like our own Indian reservations).



2. There are still over 50,000 Arab Bedouins on 'settlements' in Israel; there are tens of thousands more who have been confined to 'Palestine' and Gaza.



3. Like Aristotle quotes?



4. Yes, that is what I was doing...

1. You are probably confusing nomads with pastoral.
In 1948, through the Imams in the mosques the Arabs were convinced that they should leave Israel and return after Israel had been conquered by the Arab armies.

Most of those Arabs had arrived after 1919.

Two days after Israel established an independent state, the armies of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, with material support from other Arab countries, launched an all out invasion of Isreal, they got their asses kicked.

2. There were and are confined by the Arab countries who won't let them return to their native countries.
I don't see how anyone can blame Israel for not allowing them into Israel.

3. I agree with Aristotle that a society that allows itself to be disarmed is in danger of being ruled by a tyrantical government, do you?

4. Geez, thanks for being honest for once.




gs, I think I may have found your long lost Muslim twin.

ZIONIST ISRAEL’S CRIMES ARE NOT NEW « Muslim in Suffer


Make sure to read on down into the comments section. This guy is just as adamant as you, just from the reverse standpoint.

And no, I don't share his views. As I've said before, both sides have guilt. You continue to argue the Jews are justified. This guy argues the Muslims are justified. I do not see attrocities from either side as justified. I'm not convinced the leadership from either side wants peace, and while they bicker back and forth, innocents on both sides suffer. I want to believe given the choice much of the general populace would live in peace, but governments don't want that. Conflict is how they maintain control.

Why not devote some time to the study Islamic history and of the crimes they have committed?

They supplied three divisions of SS troops to Hitler during WWII.








Look I'm not going to read all those links, You can include
excerpts if you like.

Consider the opinion sources, the BBC is owned and opperated by the British govenment the same British government that codemned hundreds of thousands of Jews to death during WWII not allowing them to immigrate to Israel.

The Nation is published by the communist party.

And CBS is full of crap as always.

Bottom line is that the Israelis have every right to build settlements in Judea and Samaria.

Obama's call for them to withdraw to pre 1967 areas is utter insanity and tantamount to national suicide.

It's not going to happen.
 
Attacking the sources of the info is funny. Of course what you're reading is slanted, but your sources are slanted as well. That's the whole problem with "news" in today's world. You take a kernel or two of truth then build a biased arguement to support your beliefs around them and present it as fact. Sensationalism. That's what it's all about. Unbiased news no longer exists.
 
Attacking the sources of the info is funny. Of course what you're reading is slanted, but your sources are slanted as well. That's the whole problem with "news" in today's world. You take a kernel or two of truth then build a biased arguement to support your beliefs around them and present it as fact. Sensationalism. That's what it's all about. Unbiased news no longer exists.



Some is bias and some is ignorance.

A large part of the so-called news is agenda driven.

You may find the following interesting reading.

Myths & Facts Online: The Refugees

More:

ESR | June 17, 2002 | Arabs recognized Israel - 1919

The fact is that the international community, including the emerging Arab nations, recognized Israel at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference which was held by the victorious Allies in order to settle international questions after the 1918 Armistice ended World War I. An official Arab and Zionist delegation, as well as delegations from nations and groups from around the world, were invited to attend the conference. The head of the Arab delegation, Emir Feisal, great-grandfather of Abdallah, the present King of Jordan, agreed that "Palestine" would be the Jewish homeland.

Feisal accepted the British Balfour Declaration of Nov. 2, 1917, which afforded recognition to a Jewish national homeland, and agreed with the Zionist delegation stating, "All such measures shall be adopted as we afford the fullest guarantee of carrying into effect the British Government's Balfour Declaration." Emir Feisal confirmed this determination in a March 3, 1919 letter to Harvard Law Professor and later US Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter with whom he wrote: "Our deputation here in Paris is full acquainted with the proposals submitted by the Zionist organization to the Peace Conference, and we regard them as modest and proper. We will do our best, insofar as we are concerned, to help them through. We will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home."

In exchange for Arab recognition of Israel, the allied powers, in 1919, agreed to the eventual sovereignty of almost 20 Arab States, covering vast oil-rich lands, after a period of mandatory oversight by European powers.

The Europeans would proceed to draw the borders of their respective mandates and, in essence, create the system of Arab States that would emerge out of the remnants of the old Turkish Ottoman Empire. In 1922, a couple of years after the Conference, in a land for peace deal, the British would split Mandatory Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish Mandate using the Jordan River as the line of demarcation. The Arabs were granted East Palestine, or Transjordan, which would later become Arab Jordan while West Palestine, or Cis-Jordan, would become the Jewish National homeland of Israel.

In 1948, upon Israel's declaration of Independence from Britain, Jordan and Egypt, by use of aggressive military force, illegally occupied portions of the internationally recognized Jewish State. The Arab occupation continued until Israel reasserted its sovereignty, June 1967, after defending itself against an aggressive military campaign launched by combined Arab forces. Following the June 1967 war, UN Resolution 242 called on Israel to withdraw from "occupied territories." Israel proceeded to fulfill the letter and spirit of UN Resolution 242 when, in 1978, it concluded a peace treaty with Egypt and withdrew from the only territory that was, in fact, occupied by Israel which was the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula. Since that time, Israel has existed within borders that are, and have been since 1919, recognized by the nations of the world, including the Arab nations.

NO ONE, other than the nation of Israel has any legitimate claim to sovereignty over Judea and Samaria.

One can make all the silly arguments about nomads etc being fair, etc sharing blame, etc etc ad nauseum but thems the facts bud!

Now, want to talk about how terribly the moslems have treated the Christians of Lebanon?

How many young Christian men disappeared into the dungeons of Damascus during the 35 year Syrian occupation?

The original power sharing agreement called for a Christian President, a Sunni Prime Minister and a Shia Speaker of Parliament.

How many Christian presidents have been assassinated?

Join ACT for America
 
Some is bias and some is ignorance.

A large part of the so-called news is agenda driven.

You may find the following interesting reading.

Myths & Facts Online: The Refugees

More:

ESR | June 17, 2002 | Arabs recognized Israel - 1919



NO ONE, other than the nation of Israel has any legitimate claim to sovereignty over Judea and Samaria.

One can make all the silly arguments about nomads etc being fair, etc sharing blame, etc etc ad nauseum but thems the facts bud!

Now, want to talk about how terribly the moslems have treated the Christians of Lebanon?

How many young Christian men disappeared into the dungeons of Damascus during the 35 year Syrian occupation?

The original power sharing agreement called for a Christian President, a Sunni Prime Minister and a Shia Speaker of Parliament.

How many Christian presidents have been assassinated?

Join ACT for America

Still a colored point of view. Who decided Emir Feisal spoke for all Arabs? Does the Pope speak for all Christians? Who decided no one but the Jews had a legitimate claim to the land? I'm sure any Arabs that already lived there had no say in it. If Obama came knocking at your door and told you you had to move because he and Congress had decided someone else deserved your home, would you move?

Is it really that hard for you to admit both sides carry fault?

Does your hatred for Muslims stem from contradictory religious beliefs or the violence of Islamic extremists? Do you believe there are some Muslims that would be content to live in peace?
 
Still a colored point of view. 1. Who decided Emir Feisal spoke for all Arabs? 2. Does the Pope speak for all Christians? 3. Who decided no one but the Jews had a legitimate claim to the land? I'm sure any Arabs that already lived there had no say in it. 4. If Obama came knocking at your door and told you you had to move because he and Congress had decided someone else deserved your home, would you move?

5. Is it really that hard for you to admit both sides carry fault?

6. Does your hatred for Muslims stem from contradictory religious beliefs or the violence of Islamic extremists? 7. Do you believe there are some Muslims that would be content to live in peace?

You asks more questions than a five year old kid.

D12701_1.gif


1. He only spoke for the the people of Jordan. All the other Arab leaders agreed. In case you didn't know, it is written in the koran that any treaty is only to be honored until a better option is found and at ten years at most. That is why hamas honored their last ceae fire for less that forty eight hours, or enough time to receive there prisoners back and then they proceeded to fire rockets again at Israel on a daily basis.

2. FYI, 25% of the people living in Israel are Arabs and are free to live in peace will all the rights enjoyed by Jews. This was decided in peace negotiations and agreed to by eveeryone, however as I've already pointed out, moslems aren't required to keep peace treaties with the enemy and the enemy is anyone who isn't a moslem.

3. Again, I've presented the history of thetreaties, what is so hard for you to understand?

4. I'd shoot the SOB right between the eyes!

5. No, not at all but the moslems bear 99.9% of the fault. Again, I don't see why that is so hard for you to understand.

6. First it hasn't been established that I hate anyone, that is your conjecture. I do oppose a worldwide caliphate which rules the world, that is the objective of islam, don't fool yourself into believeing any differently.

7. There are all shades and shapes of moslems, many would love to leave islam and don't believe it's barbaric law and it's hateful screed, they are only moslem because of their misfortune of being born into a moslem family.

You ask, why don't they repudicate islam? Again there are many reasons the top two would be possible death for apostay as islamic sharia law declares and probable ostracism from their own family.
 
gs, I will admit I am not an expert on Islam, but the few Muslims I have met were not violent people. In fact, they were pacifistic if anything. I do know that there is much violence carried out in the name of Islam, just as violence was committed in the past in the name of Christianity. Is there no chance that the divide between the extremists and non-extremists is in their interpretation of the Quaran? I haven't read the book myself, I've only seen chosen quotes which could easily be taken out of context, but as a holy book, I assume it would be open to interpretation, much like the Bible.

Sorry if questioning bothers you, but how else do you have a dialogue? I prefer to question, listen, and try to understand and interpretate rather than be spoonfed. Not big on following or believing things at face value.

My response to your responses:

1) I doubt that leaders in the effected areas, if they indeed did have leaders, were present at the negotiations. As stated above, I have not read the Quaran so do not know the Islamist view of treaties, but it doesn't sound so different than most of our countries early treaties with the Native Americans.

2) Not all accounts I have read support your arguement that Muslims are treated fairly by the Israeli govt. The Jews are just as capable of breaking treaties as well.

3) Nothing hard to understand, I was just alluding to the point made above. The people who stood to be effected the most had no representation at the meetings for those who would decide their fate. Seems like we fought a war about that ourselves once upon a time.

4) Exactly. You would defend your home. Or at least use that as your excuse to shoot Obama.

5)It's hard for me to understand because I have no idea how you came up with those stats or how you apportion the blame. You're posts come across as being very far from unbiased. How much of that goes into your equation?

6) Your posts are very anti-Islam. Maybe hate is a strong word but there is absolutely a dislike. Your words support that arguement. And again, I have not read the Quaran so I don't know what the end objective is for Islam. I assume it ends with everything being rosy for "true" Muslims, just as the Bible ends with everything being rosy for "true" Christians. How that objective is achieved may be different, but most religions end story is happiness for the devout followers. And of course, who the devout followers are is open to interpretation.

7) Again, I'm not sure where you are getting these notions from. It seems more a matter of interpretation and less a matter of true fact. Do they have some antiquated laws? Yes, but then again, so does the Bible. That doesn't mean civilized people cannot come together and reshape their beliefs to a different degree. Can Muslims do that? I don't know, but neither do you.We, as a country, do seem do have dealings with some Arab countries that do not follow sharia law to the letter. The problem is more about the extremists, which I allow seems to be a growing number, and not the religion itself.

In the case of Israel/Palestine, IMO, a peaceful decision needs to be found. Both sides need to sit down and hammer out something they can live with. At this point, neither side wants to bend. As much as you wish to defend Israel, their govt has not shown a willingness to truly negotiate. Sitting down at a table together is far from making concessions, which is what both sides must do.

In the case of extremists, Muslims need to learn to police their own. From what I see, their unwillingness to do so is one of their greatest weaknesses. If they were to act accordingly, strides could actually be made in the direction of peace.

But hey, I could easily be wrong, and I'm sure you'll probably point out that I am. :thumbsup:
 
gs, I will admit I am not an expert on Islam, but the few Muslims I have met were not violent people. In fact, they were pacifistic if anything. I do know that there is much violence carried out in the name of Islam, just as violence was committed in the past in the name of Christianity. Is there no chance that the divide between the extremists and non-extremists is in their interpretation of the Quaran? I haven't read the book myself, I've only seen chosen quotes which could easily be taken out of context, but as a holy book, I assume it would be open to interpretation, much like the Bible.

Sorry if questioning bothers you, but how else do you have a dialogue? I prefer to question, listen, and try to understand and interpretate rather than be spoonfed. Not big on following or believing things at face value.

My response to your responses:

1) I doubt that leaders in the effected areas, if they indeed did have leaders, were present at the negotiations. As stated above, I have not read the Quaran so do not know the Islamist view of treaties, but it doesn't sound so different than most of our countries early treaties with the Native Americans.

2) Not all accounts I have read support your arguement that Muslims are treated fairly by the Israeli govt. The Jews are just as capable of breaking treaties as well.

3) Nothing hard to understand, I was just alluding to the point made above. The people who stood to be effected the most had no representation at the meetings for those who would decide their fate. Seems like we fought a war about that ourselves once upon a time.

4) Exactly. You would defend your home. Or at least use that as your excuse to shoot Obama.

5)It's hard for me to understand because I have no idea how you came up with those stats or how you apportion the blame. You're posts come across as being very far from unbiased. How much of that goes into your equation?

6) Your posts are very anti-Islam. Maybe hate is a strong word but there is absolutely a dislike. Your words support that arguement. And again, I have not read the Quaran so I don't know what the end objective is for Islam. I assume it ends with everything being rosy for "true" Muslims, just as the Bible ends with everything being rosy for "true" Christians. How that objective is achieved may be different, but most religions end story is happiness for the devout followers. And of course, who the devout followers are is open to interpretation.

7) Again, I'm not sure where you are getting these notions from. It seems more a matter of interpretation and less a matter of true fact. Do they have some antiquated laws? Yes, but then again, so does the Bible. That doesn't mean civilized people cannot come together and reshape their beliefs to a different degree. Can Muslims do that? I don't know, but neither do you.We, as a country, do seem do have dealings with some Arab countries that do not follow sharia law to the letter. The problem is more about the extremists, which I allow seems to be a growing number, and not the religion itself.

A. In the case of Israel/Palestine, IMO, a peaceful decision needs to be found. Both sides need to sit down and hammer out something they can live with. At this point, neither side wants to bend. As much as you wish to defend Israel, their govt has not shown a willingness to truly negotiate. Sitting down at a table together is far from making concessions, which is what both sides must do.

B. In the case of extremists, Muslims need to learn to police their own. From what I see, their unwillingness to do so is one of their greatest weaknesses. If they were to act accordingly, strides could actually be made in the direction of peace.

But hey, I could easily be wrong, and I'm sure you'll probably point out that I am. :thumbsup:

As a primer on islam, google up the history of islam in India.

Political Islam // Articles // Sharia Law for Non-Muslims Chapter 1 May 20, 2010

Islam is a complete system and by their own admission mean to rule the whole world through their law which includes politics, law, financial transactions etc etc.

I don't recognize the quran as a Holy book, if anything it is inspired of the devil, read "Satanic Verses".

You have lots of questions but few if any answers grasshopper.

1. "Affected areas" no effected areas.

2. But they don't make a habit of it as the Arabs do.

D12701_3.gif


24mykw6.jpg


3. Again, affected not effected. Those people made their choices, now they have to live with it.

4. Poorly chosen words on my part but the question in no way fits the situation and circumstances. These people are not being kicked out of their homes, Judea and Samaria isn't wall to wall houses, the Israelis are for the most part building on unoccupied land.

5. Would you then deny the Jews a homeland of their own?

6. STudy islam and it's bloody history and you will come to the same conclusion as mine, whether you believe anything else of not.

7. One major difference is that the Quaran demands adherence to it's barbaric and backward laws, the New Testament does not. Islam is extremist at it's very core, nothing is going to change that. The only answer is to stand up and speak out for what is good and right, no amount of appeasement will ever satisfy the demands of islam.


A. That is total bull crap.

The Israelis have conceeded the Sinai and Gaza, what has that gotten them, not one damned thing.

B. Agreed.
 

VN Store



Back
Top