TEN QUESTIONS to the Zionists

[The Sloth]

Everyone that gets to know me understands my stance on Zionism, both its evil roots and its future.

This particular post deals with something that most individuals do not realize: the Zionist role in the Holocaust.

Basically, spiritual Zionism is virtually extinct and political Zionism has dominated the scene for a while now...during the Holocaust (of which the Zionists were perfectly aware), the Zionists in America and Europe had ample opprtunity to save many Jews from Hitler's wrath, possibly between thousands and millions. However, in their pathological political greed and blind obsession with establishing a Jewish state, they refused to allocate the funds and flex the necessary influence on saving Jews because they ONLY wanted individuals to be re-located to Palestine to start creating more settlements. The German Gestapo, for example, offered the release of Jews under the conditions that they are NOT to be re-located to Palestine; of course, the anti-Semitic Zionists refused.

Taken from "Jews Against Zionism"...

TEN QUESTIONS to the Zionists:

1. IS IT TRUE that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain, if they would relinquish all their property in Germany and Occupied France; on condition that:

a) none of the deportees travel from Spain to Palestine; and
b) all the deportees be transported from Spain to the USA or British colonies, and there to remain; with entry visas to be arranged by the Jews living there; and
c) $1000 ransom for each family to be furnished by the Agency, payable upon the arrival of the family at the Spanish border at the rate of 1000 families daily.

2. IS IT TRUE that the Zionist leaders in Switzerland and Turkey received this offer with the clear understanding that the exclusion of Palestine as a destination for the deportees was based on an agreement between the Gestapo and the Mufti.

3. IS IT TRUE that the answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments:

a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees.
b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war.
c) No ransom will be paid

4. IS IT TRUE that this response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber,

5. IS IT TRUE that in 1944, at the time of the Hungarian deportations, a similar offer was made, whereby all Hungarian Jewry could be saved,

6. IS IT TRUE that the same Zionist hierarchy again refused this offer (after the gas chambers had already taken a toll of millions),

7. IS IT TRUE that during the height of the killings in the war, 270 Members of the British Parliament proposed to evacuate 500,000 Jews from Europe, and resettle them in British colonies, as a part of diplomatic negotiations with Germany,

8. IS IT TRUE that this offer was rejected by the Zionist leaders with the observation "Only to Palestine!",

9. IS IT TRUE that the British government granted visas to 300 rabbis and their families to the Colony of Mauritius, with passage for the evacuees through Turkey. The "Jewish Agency" leaders sabotaged this plan with the observation that the plan was disloyal to Palestine, and the 300 rabbis and their families should be gassed,

10. IS IT TRUE that during the course of the negotiations mentioned above, Chaim Weitzman, the first "Jewish statesman" stated: "The most valuable part of the Jewish nation is already in Palestine, and those Jews living outside Palestine are not too important", Weitzman's cohort, Greenbaum, amplified this statement with the observation "One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Europe"?

[DSCH]

Those seem like very strange and bizarre questions to be asking Zionists. Zionism simply means the belief in a Jewish Israel. Jews have lived in Israel ever since the Exodus from Egypt. So I guess I just have one question for you. How can Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jews, be Islam's third holiest city when Jerusalem is mention exactly zero times in the Koran?

[(*]

First of all. It is mentioned.

Secondly, what difference does it make whether it is mentioned or not?
Mecca and Medina are mentioned very few times as well.


Sorry to break it to you, but Jews do not have the right to the land anymore than Muslims.


And what is this about "Jerusalem being the external capital of the Jews" ???

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2004, 02:24 AM
Those seem like very strange and bizarre questions to be asking Zionists. Zionism simply means the belief in a Jewish Israel. Jews have lived in Israel ever since the Exodus from Egypt. So I guess I just have one question for you. How can Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jews, be Islam's third holiest city when Jerusalem is mention exactly zero times in the Koran?
Alright fine, so when descendants of Native American tribes visit my home to demand their land back, I'll comply.

No, you see, Palestinians were pushed out of their land by force and made false promises, such as David Ben Gorion's, "there will be no dominating race in Israel" bullsh*t.

But hey, I'll debate the justification for pushing out the Palestinians some other day (although you can't really call it justification), but for now, I just want individuals to let it sink in that the Zionists, the individuals that are supposedly bent on "helping" the Jewish cause actually did nothing to hinder the Holocaust although it was all in their power.

By the way, doesn't the Torah mention that the Jews are supposed to wait for their homeland, and probably suffer during this time, until their Messiah comes down and grants this homeland to them? Who is their Messiah? Is Ralph Bunche, the one that negotiated the deal to get the Jews into Palestine, the Jewish Messiah? Probably not, so what are the Jews doing there ahead of Him?

And hey, you want to say that the Jews have 'historical' and 'religious' claims to Palestine? So many Jews in the area have NO genetic difference between themselves and Palestinians, so the common heritage suggests...common ownership?

The Muslims used to control Spain; it is Islamic prophecy that Allah condones seeing His children victorious over all other peoples, and since the Muslims were taking steps towards this end when they controlled so much of Europe, the right thing to do is to return the land to them, the very land that they conquered centuries ago.

:rolleyes:

[BuyOurEverything]

Well I don't know what happened to Malte's post, but I'd like to see some sources on that shit. As for Israel, do you believe that the Jews have a right to their own state? And if not, what do you propose to do with the Jews presently living in Israel?

[Eastside Revolt]

I'm not replying to the questions for the zionists. I too would like to see sources.

Buyoureverything,

In my opinion, no religion deserves it's own state, especially when the area of land occupied by that state is home to members of other religions too. As for the jews presently in Isreal, they can stay there all the want but they need to put an end to the concentration camp that is Palestine. They need to stop occupying land ny military force.

[BuyOurEverything]

I completely agree that no religion deserves a country, but Judaism is also a culture and the Jews have been extremely oppressed throughout history. If anyone deserves a country, they do. I also agree that they need to stop occupying Palestine, but they still deserve to exist.

[Eastside Revolt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2004, 03:42 AM
Judaism is also a culture and the Jews have been extremely oppressed throughout history. If anyone deserves a country, they do.
According to Hitler, the "Aryans" had been greatly persecuted thoughout history, and if anyone deserved the world it was them.

[Guest1]

Uhh... I really don't undertsand this bullshit that Judaism isn't the same as every other religion.

I'm sorry, I don't like the post that started this thread, but your response that somehow Judaism deserves a state more than any other religion is rediculous.

Theocratic states are theocratic states, no matter what religion is running them. The fact is, there was a historical reason for Zionism, which was understandable, but it was misguided and has now been perverted.

[BuyOurEverything]

RC and CyM: I am not advocating a theocratic state, nor do I believe that the Jews have some biblical or divine right to Haretz Yisrael, but I do believe that the Jewish people, as a historically oppressed culture, do have a right to a homeland. This does not give them the right to force other people out of their land however. The Nazi comparison is bullshit, no sane person believes that the Jews should conquer the world. I agree with you, CyM, that Zionism has been perverted, however as you said, there was a historical reason for it. That reason has not disappeared.

[Guest1]

Actually, that reason has been reversed. No state has proven so conclusively that Theocratic Nationalism is never to be supported than the state of Israel. Simply stated, it is today the only socially acceptable Theocracy and has done no good with that status.

That state has done more to proliferate anti-Semitism than marginalized Neo-Nazis ever could on their own.

The solution to racism and intolerance is fewer walls, not more of them. The argument that there is still a necessity for some states to be based upon religion and race is a racist one. <_<

I see also that you ignored my attack on your assertions about culture and religion, how Judaism is unique in being a culture as well, and thus deserves a Theocracy where as other religions do not.

While I think that Jews have been oppressed and need a haven from racism, I think it would require a fresh start and a haven for all. I, a Palestinian, call for the destruction of Palestine. In the realm of the mind of course.

I only hope Israelis can have the foresight to call for the destruction of Israel. Again, in the collective mind.

From that point, we can begin to build a new nation, for anyone that wants to come. Open borders and open arms to all the oppressed of the world.

Who knows, maybe that nation can be a nation in name only, with worker&#39;s collectives cropping up across the country as people turn their attention from slaughtering their brothers and sisters to building a better world together with them.

[BuyOurEverything]

I think that Jews have been oppressed and need a haven from racism

And that&#39;s really all I&#39;m saying. You know how many times I had to put up with bullshit anti-semitism? I&#39;m not trying to defend Isaeli oppression of Palestinians. I think it&#39;s horrible. I simply believe that Jews deserve a state as much as any other culture deserves a state.

I don&#39;t see a worker&#39;s revolution happening in either country while both is blaming the other for all its problems. Until both states recognize each other&#39;s right to exist (and Israel is at fault far more than Palestne on this) there will be no peace, and no class consiousness, and no revolution among either people.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 12 2004, 07:50 AM
From that point, we can begin to build a new nation, for anyone that wants to come. Open borders and open arms to all the oppressed of the world.

Wouldnt it be much easy for oppressed people of the world to stand up against there oppresses and defeat them. It&#39;s a lot more sane&#39;r then creating a utopia for all the down trodden to come and live in harmony. Vey idiotic.

[The Sloth]

Alright, here is my source:

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/tenquestions.htm

As you will see, the "question" section appears exactly as I have posted it.

These individuals have much more credibility because they are actually Jews themselves; Orthodox Jews at that, they are scholars that have been studying Zionism and their roots. www.jewsagainstzionism.com is an incredible website.

On the question of, what do I propose to do to with Israel...

It&#39;s simple: it would be wrong to drive the many Israelis now occupying the area...they have no control over their government, nor were they there to drive the Palestinians out. I propose, however, exactly what has been agreed on a long time ago: Israel CANNOT legally occupy the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Stop the settlements, stop the bulldozers, tanks, soldiers, etc.

How long has their occupation of the two aforementioned territories violated UN resolutions? Well, since 1952, this is the list...more violations than any other nation on Earth...

1953-1992:

* Resolution 106: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for Gaza raid".
* Resolution 111: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
* Resolution 127: " . . . &#39;recommends&#39; Israel suspends it&#39;s &#39;no-man&#39;s zone&#39; in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 162: " . . . &#39;urges&#39; Israel to comply with UN decisions".
* Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations&#39; by Israel in its attack on Syria".
* Resolution 228: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
* Resolution 237: " . . . &#39;urges&#39; Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
* Resolution 248: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
* Resolution 250: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 251: " . . . &#39;deeply deplores&#39; Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
* Resolution 252: " . . . &#39;declares invalid&#39; Israel&#39;s acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
* Resolution 256: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli raids on Jordan as &#39;flagrant violation".
* Resolution 259: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
* Resolution 262: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
* Resolution 265: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
* Resolution 267: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
*Resolution 270: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
* Resolution 271: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
* Resolution 279: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 280: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli&#39;s attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 285: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
* Resolution 298: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s changing of the status of Jerusalem".
* Resolution 313: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 316: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 317: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
* Resolution 332: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s repeated attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 337: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for violating Lebanon&#39;s sovereignty".
* Resolution 347: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 425: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 427: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
* Resolution 444: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
* Resolution 446: " . . . &#39;determines&#39; that Israeli settlements are a &#39;serious
obstruction&#39; to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 450: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
* Resolution 452: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
* Resolution 465: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s settlements and asks all member
states not to assist Israel&#39;s settlements program".
* Resolution 467: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s military intervention in Lebanon".
* Resolution 468: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of
two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
* Resolution 469: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s failure to observe the
council&#39;s order not to deport Palestinians".
* Resolution 471: " . . . &#39;expresses deep concern&#39; at Israel&#39;s failure to abide
by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 476: " . . . &#39;reiterates&#39; that Israel&#39;s claim to Jerusalem are &#39;null and void&#39;".
* Resolution 478: " . . . &#39;censures (Israel) in the strongest terms&#39; for its
claim to Jerusalem in its &#39;Basic Law&#39;".
* Resolution 484: " . . . &#39;declares it imperative&#39; that Israel re-admit two deported
Palestinian mayors".
* Resolution 487: " . . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel for its attack on Iraq&#39;s
nuclear facility".
* Resolution 497: " . . . &#39;decides&#39; that Israel&#39;s annexation of Syria&#39;s Golan
Heights is &#39;null and void&#39; and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
* Resolution 498: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
* Resolution 501: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
* Resolution 509: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
* Resolution 515: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and
allow food supplies to be brought in".
* Resolution 517: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions
and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 518: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
* Resolution 520: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s attack into West Beirut".
* Resolution 573: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel &#39;vigorously&#39; for bombing Tunisia
in attack on PLO headquarters.
* Resolution 587: " . . . &#39;takes note&#39; of previous calls on Israel to withdraw
its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
* Resolution 592: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; the killing of Palestinian students
at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
* Resolution 605: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s policies and practices
denying the human rights of Palestinians.
* Resolution 607: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly
requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
* Resolution 608: " . . . &#39;deeply regrets&#39; that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
* Resolution 636: " . . . &#39;deeply regrets&#39; Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
* Resolution 641: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s continuing deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 672: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for violence against Palestinians
at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
* Resolution 673: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to cooperate with the United
Nations.
* Resolution 681: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s resumption of the deportation of
Palestinians.
* Resolution 694: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of Palestinians and
calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
* Resolution 726: " . . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 799: ". . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of 413 Palestinians
and calls for there immediate return.

http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pa...resolutions.htm (http://www.action-for-un-renewal.org.uk/pages/isreal_un_resolutions.htm)


And we bombed Iraq for &#39;UN resolution violations&#39;, instead? <_<

[Intifada]

When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, he was ordered to withdraw by the UN. When Saddam ignored this call, Iraq was attacked so badly that thousands upon thousands were killed. When Israel decided to take full control of the West Bank and Gaza, it was also ordered to get out by the same UN Security Council. That was more than 35 years ago. Instead of attacking Israel, the west has continued to reward it with billions of dollars in aid and arms, and helped it develop nuclear weapons.

Hypocrisy?

Freedom for Palestine&#33;

[LSD]

Hypocrisy?

From the US? NEVER&#33;&#33;&#33;

I doubt it suprises anyone that the US has acted hypocritically, but it&#39;s irrelvent to this thread.


Although, of course, many of the Israeli government&#39;s actions have been, and continue to be, deplorable, the consistent focus on Israel-Palestine is bizarre. Both in the UN and the world at large, way to much attention is given to this issue. Of course, if one is Palestinian or Israeli it is an imporant issue, but in terms of the world at large?

Isreal may be oppressive, but compared to Saudi Arabia?
or China?
or Syria?
or Iran?
or North Korea?
or Pakistan?
or Lybia?

Hell, Uzbekistan, Russia, Angola, and half the countries in Africa are far worse than Israel.

So with that in mind, and the understanding that the Chinese government has killed an estimateed 60 MILLION civilians (that&#39;s more than ten times the population of Palestine, by the way), let&#39;s look again at how many UN resolutions have concerned Israel....


Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;Mecca
1953-1992:

* Resolution 106: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for Gaza raid".
* Resolution 111: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
* Resolution 127: " . . . &#39;recommends&#39; Israel suspends it&#39;s &#39;no-man&#39;s zone&#39; in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 162: " . . . &#39;urges&#39; Israel to comply with UN decisions".
* Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations&#39; by Israel in its attack on Syria".
* Resolution 228: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
* Resolution 237: " . . . &#39;urges&#39; Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
* Resolution 248: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
* Resolution 250: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 251: " . . . &#39;deeply deplores&#39; Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
* Resolution 252: " . . . &#39;declares invalid&#39; Israel&#39;s acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
* Resolution 256: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli raids on Jordan as &#39;flagrant violation".
* Resolution 259: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
* Resolution 262: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
* Resolution 265: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
* Resolution 267: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
*Resolution 270: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
* Resolution 271: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
* Resolution 279: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 280: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli&#39;s attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 285: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
* Resolution 298: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s changing of the status of Jerusalem".
* Resolution 313: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 316: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 317: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
* Resolution 332: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s repeated attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 337: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for violating Lebanon&#39;s sovereignty".
* Resolution 347: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 425: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 427: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
* Resolution 444: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
* Resolution 446: " . . . &#39;determines&#39; that Israeli settlements are a &#39;serious
obstruction&#39; to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 450: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
* Resolution 452: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
* Resolution 465: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s settlements and asks all member
states not to assist Israel&#39;s settlements program".
* Resolution 467: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s military intervention in Lebanon".
* Resolution 468: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of
two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
* Resolution 469: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s failure to observe the
council&#39;s order not to deport Palestinians".
* Resolution 471: " . . . &#39;expresses deep concern&#39; at Israel&#39;s failure to abide
by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 476: " . . . &#39;reiterates&#39; that Israel&#39;s claim to Jerusalem are &#39;null and void&#39;".
* Resolution 478: " . . . &#39;censures (Israel) in the strongest terms&#39; for its
claim to Jerusalem in its &#39;Basic Law&#39;".
* Resolution 484: " . . . &#39;declares it imperative&#39; that Israel re-admit two deported
Palestinian mayors".
* Resolution 487: " . . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel for its attack on Iraq&#39;s
nuclear facility".
* Resolution 497: " . . . &#39;decides&#39; that Israel&#39;s annexation of Syria&#39;s Golan
Heights is &#39;null and void&#39; and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
* Resolution 498: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
* Resolution 501: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
* Resolution 509: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
* Resolution 515: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and
allow food supplies to be brought in".
* Resolution 517: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions
and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 518: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
* Resolution 520: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s attack into West Beirut".
* Resolution 573: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel &#39;vigorously&#39; for bombing Tunisia
in attack on PLO headquarters.
* Resolution 587: " . . . &#39;takes note&#39; of previous calls on Israel to withdraw
its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
* Resolution 592: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; the killing of Palestinian students
at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
* Resolution 605: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s policies and practices
denying the human rights of Palestinians.
* Resolution 607: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly
requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
* Resolution 608: " . . . &#39;deeply regrets&#39; that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
* Resolution 636: " . . . &#39;deeply regrets&#39; Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
* Resolution 641: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s continuing deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 672: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for violence against Palestinians
at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
* Resolution 673: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to cooperate with the United
Nations.
* Resolution 681: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s resumption of the deportation of
Palestinians.
* Resolution 694: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of Palestinians and
calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
* Resolution 726: " . . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 799: ". . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of 413 Palestinians
and calls for there immediate return.

Now, I am by no means a Zionist, but the way that the left has adopted this cause as the "last great struggel" is sickening. There are far worse evils in the world, and focusing so much attention on only one issue is lazy and hyprocritical. The people of Sudan deserve just as much attention as the people of Palestine.

They&#39;re not getting it

While I&#39;m sure it&#39;s fun to just jump on the bandwagon since it&#39;s got so many damn people one it, if you actually care about injustice in the world, look somewhere else, there are plenty of people dealing with this one already.

[BuyOurEverything]

Brooklyn-Mecca: What makes you think Jews against Zionism is credible? They&#39;re a fringe religious sect. There&#39;s plenty of Jews against Zionism because of the oppressive actions taken by the Israeli government, but the perticular group you linked to opposes Zionism because of the Torah.

[Loknar]

Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;[email protected] 12 2004, 01:50 AM
7. IS IT TRUE that during the height of the killings in the war, 270 Members of the British Parliament proposed to evacuate 500,000 Jews from Europe, and resettle them in British colonies, as a part of diplomatic negotiations with Germany,

I dont see why t his question has a roused your wrath. Why was Britain obligated to negotiate with Germany? Those Jews were hostages, and it was a sign of desperation. The Russian offensive that year and the allied offensive that same year pushed Germany back into Germany proper. Germany collapsed 4 months into 1945. If the British decided to negotiate then war a bout t he Gypsies? Slavs? ect..



Those other questions are valid. However, that being said, Israel has every right to exist. If arabs want to conquer t hen they can expect to be conquered.

[The Sloth]

Who said anything about invading Israel? I&#39;m only asking it to stop occupying the lands of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

This particular issue is of concern to me simply because I see Zionism going a little too far...simply put, it controls too much of our own foreign policy right here in America. Second, it&#39;s important to remember that critics of Zionism are called "anti-Semites," thus making it also a fight against propaganda...it&#39;s too bad that everyone is brainwashed this far. I only want to reverse the hypnosis.

[LSD]

This particular issue is of concern to me simply because I see Zionism going a little too far

um...where&#39;s it going?

As far as I can tell, the aims of Zionism haven&#39;t really changed.


simply put, it controls too much of our own foreign policy right here in America.

Like what?

Mainly, its others that keep bringing up the issue. Sure the US gives a fair amount to Israel, but it also gives a lot to Egypt, Colombia, Saudi Arabia.... and let&#39;s not forget that the amount being given is minute in comparison with the annual US budget.


Second, it&#39;s important to remember that critics of Zionism are called "anti-Semites," thus making it also a fight against propaganda

Believe it or not, there are more important avenues in which to direct your efforts. But then again, if you think that mislabeling is more important than genocide, continue to focus on what people are "called".


...it&#39;s too bad that everyone is brainwashed this far.

First, let&#39;s remember that anti-semitism does exist, and with that understood let&#39;s remember that most of the world is not on Israel&#39;s side. It isn&#39;t as though the world has been "brainwashed" to the Isreali banner. Anti-Israeli sentiment has been on the rise for thirty years. You&#39;d be hard-pressed to find a European country in which the majority support Israel, in fact I doubt one exists. Furthermore, anti-semetic attacks are on the rise in Europe and America as well, so if Israel has the world "brainwashed", apparently it&#39;s ordering its "minions" to kill jews.


I only want to reverse the hypnosis.

How noble of you.

Try reversing war first. I don&#39;t know, but mass-murder strikes me as slightly more important.

[Kurai Tsuki]

Arabs were living in Palestine long before the Israearseholes arrived from Egypt and started insisting on administering the place. And the Jews were a minute minority when the Zio****s arrived in 1948.

Why should the Palestinians have to give up their homeland because the Jews are not the original owners of any land?

[lucid]

Stop the jews&#33; (http://www.protestwarrior.com/poster_sets/sign_24.pdf)

[LSD]

Arabs were living in Palestine long before the Israearseholes arrived from Egypt and started insisting on administering the place. And the Jews were a minute minority when the Zio****s arrived in 1948.

And the Europeans were a minute minority (read: 0) in America when Columbus landed. It&#39;s called migration, it&#39;s called occupation, it&#39;s called settling.

Unjust? Maybe. But that&#39;s the situation.

Repeating the past does nothing but infuriate the situation. I don&#39;t see you offering any practical solutions, merely repeating the cry that Israel&#39;s creation was wrong. To tell you the truth, I couldn&#39;t care less why or how Israel was created outside of the confines of a history exam. The situation is that there are a hell of a lot of Israelis there now, and any realistic solution would have to take that into account.

And remember, if you really want to go into the past, remember that the Palestinians came to the land from somewhere else, the original occupants being mostly displaced by the Romans, the Romans who came in and occupied the land, after the Persians had occupied it and after the Babylonians had occupied it and the Assyrians had occupied it. It&#39;s the relentless tide of history, get over it.

The Palestianians are no more the "rightfull owners" of the land than the Israelis are or the British were. No one "owns" the land. By this point every great power in the region has occupied it at least once, but you don&#39;t see Chaldea logging a complaint.

You want to help the Palestianians? Good.
The way to do it through practical options, not juvenile grandstanding.


Why should the Palestinians have to give up their homeland because the Jews are not the original owners of any land?

They shouldn&#39;t.

They should "give up their homeland" because moral absolutism isn&#39;t going to solve this. Declaring that "this land is my land" may sound good in an ethics class, but it is exactly the attitude that has stalemated negotiations on both sides.

Are the Palestinians suffering? Yes, bnd to think that it&#39;s the most important issue in the world today is the height of stupidity.



Stop the jews&#33;

hmmm.... I seem to remember a German fellow saying something similar around 1932 or so...

[synthesis]

The reason so many people make such a big fuss about Israel is because there is so much effort by the government and media to justify and sugar-coat the actions of the Israeli government.

I don&#39;t know about you, but I can&#39;t recall FOX News or Joseph Lieberman extolling the greatness of the Hutus or harping on the maliciousness or worthlessness of the Shan of Myanmar or the East Timorese or the Cypriots or the Kurds.

People don&#39;t need to be convinced that genocide, democide, and politicide are bad things. It&#39;s a pretty universal stigma. The case that needs to be made is whether or not the Israeli government is actually partaking in these horrific actions, which is what most of us are trying to raise awareness of.

[LSD]

The reason so many people make such a big fuss about Israel is because there is so much effort by the government and media to justify and sugar-coat the actions of the Israeli government.

I don&#39;t know about you, but I can&#39;t recall FOX News or Joseph Lieberman extolling the greatness of the Hutus or harping on the maliciousness or worthlessness of the Shan of Myanmar or the East Timorese or the Cypriots or the Kurds.

There has been an effort to "sugar-coat" the actions of the Colombian government, but it has largely worked since no one is contesting it.

There has been an effort to "sugar-coat" the actions of the Pakistani government, but it has largely worked since no one is contesting it.

There has been an effort to "sugar-coat" the actions of the Saudi Arabian government, but it has largely worked since no one is contesting it.


The US has a long and glorious history of defending its allies and condenmning only its enemies. Israel is hardly the only example of this. What Israel does have, however is continuous press coverage. Coverage which, although not unbiased, certainly exposes most people to the issue. And again, the idea that most people are "brainwashed" to the Israeli cause is demonstrably false. In the latest poll, only 40% of Americans support Israel while 15 % support the Palestinians, while this demonstrates that more Americans are on "Israel&#39;s side" it also shows that a full seventh is actively against it, again demonstrating that they have been "exposed."

In Europe, on the other hand, the numbers are reversed, with greater support for the Palestinians, and if that doesn&#39;t show a lack of "brainwashing" I don&#39;t know what does.


People don&#39;t need to be convinced that genocide, democide, and politicide are bad things. It&#39;s a pretty universal stigma.

Everyone thinks they&#39;re bad, the point is that no one is doing anything about it. The attention is being focused on a "crime" that in comprarison with what many of Israel&#39;s neighbours have done is not nearly as criminal.


The case that needs to be made is whether or not the Israeli government is actually partaking in these horrific actions, which is what most of us are trying to raise awareness of.

Awareness?

Let&#39;s look at that list again:

1953-1992:

* Resolution 106: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for Gaza raid".
* Resolution 111: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
* Resolution 127: " . . . &#39;recommends&#39; Israel suspends it&#39;s &#39;no-man&#39;s zone&#39; in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 162: " . . . &#39;urges&#39; Israel to comply with UN decisions".
* Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations&#39; by Israel in its attack on Syria".
* Resolution 228: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
* Resolution 237: " . . . &#39;urges&#39; Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
* Resolution 248: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
* Resolution 250: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 251: " . . . &#39;deeply deplores&#39; Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
* Resolution 252: " . . . &#39;declares invalid&#39; Israel&#39;s acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
* Resolution 256: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli raids on Jordan as &#39;flagrant violation".
* Resolution 259: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
* Resolution 262: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
* Resolution 265: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
* Resolution 267: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
*Resolution 270: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
* Resolution 271: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
* Resolution 279: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 280: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli&#39;s attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 285: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
* Resolution 298: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s changing of the status of Jerusalem".
* Resolution 313: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 316: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 317: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
* Resolution 332: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s repeated attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 337: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for violating Lebanon&#39;s sovereignty".
* Resolution 347: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 425: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 427: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
* Resolution 444: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
* Resolution 446: " . . . &#39;determines&#39; that Israeli settlements are a &#39;serious
obstruction&#39; to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 450: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
* Resolution 452: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
* Resolution 465: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s settlements and asks all member
states not to assist Israel&#39;s settlements program".
* Resolution 467: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s military intervention in Lebanon".
* Resolution 468: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of
two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
* Resolution 469: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s failure to observe the
council&#39;s order not to deport Palestinians".
* Resolution 471: " . . . &#39;expresses deep concern&#39; at Israel&#39;s failure to abide
by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 476: " . . . &#39;reiterates&#39; that Israel&#39;s claim to Jerusalem are &#39;null and void&#39;".
* Resolution 478: " . . . &#39;censures (Israel) in the strongest terms&#39; for its
claim to Jerusalem in its &#39;Basic Law&#39;".
* Resolution 484: " . . . &#39;declares it imperative&#39; that Israel re-admit two deported
Palestinian mayors".
* Resolution 487: " . . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel for its attack on Iraq&#39;s
nuclear facility".
* Resolution 497: " . . . &#39;decides&#39; that Israel&#39;s annexation of Syria&#39;s Golan
Heights is &#39;null and void&#39; and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
* Resolution 498: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
* Resolution 501: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
* Resolution 509: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
* Resolution 515: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and
allow food supplies to be brought in".
* Resolution 517: " . . . &#39;censures&#39; Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions
and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 518: " . . . &#39;demands&#39; that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
* Resolution 520: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s attack into West Beirut".
* Resolution 573: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel &#39;vigorously&#39; for bombing Tunisia
in attack on PLO headquarters.
* Resolution 587: " . . . &#39;takes note&#39; of previous calls on Israel to withdraw
its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
* Resolution 592: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; the killing of Palestinian students
at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
* Resolution 605: " . . . &#39;strongly deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s policies and practices
denying the human rights of Palestinians.
* Resolution 607: " . . . &#39;calls&#39; on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly
requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
* Resolution 608: " . . . &#39;deeply regrets&#39; that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
* Resolution 636: " . . . &#39;deeply regrets&#39; Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
* Resolution 641: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s continuing deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 672: " . . . &#39;condemns&#39; Israel for violence against Palestinians
at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
* Resolution 673: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s refusal to cooperate with the United
Nations.
* Resolution 681: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s resumption of the deportation of
Palestinians.
* Resolution 694: " . . . &#39;deplores&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of Palestinians and
calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
* Resolution 726: " . . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 799: ". . . &#39;strongly condemns&#39; Israel&#39;s deportation of 413 Palestinians
and calls for there immediate return.

hmmm...

I think the problem is overawareness, certainly not a lack of it.

How do the most murderous regimes on earth justify condemning anyone for Human rights violations? China "[calling] on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention" has got to be one of the most ludicrous events in history.

Tell me, do you think that maybe it was trying to "raise awareness"?

[synthesis]

What Israel does have, however is continuous press coverage.

The problem here is a certain degree of realism. Colombia and Saudi Arabia both produce valuable exports that American business interests are far too involved in for any sort of domestic activism short of a revolution to really dispose of.

Israel, however, is of little material value to U.S. corporate interests aside from being a potential stronghold of Western capitalism should there be more substantive conflicts between the Middle East and the West. As Lucid&#39;s sarcastic flyer suggests, Israel is far too small to be of significant use to America and her subsidiaries.

This is somewhat linked to the other major disparity between your examples and Israel. The former governments are able to stay in power in a large part because of their exports - the money generated prevents popular revolt. Israel, however, would have been horrifically decimated years ago were it not for American financial and military aid. Logic would suggest that the potential revoking of aid could prevent Israeli governmental atrocities in the future.

(I am aware that the C.I.A. has assisted other countries, such as the ones you listed [notably with the School of the Americas], with military aid; however, they did not rely on American assistance to the degree that Israel has.)

These significant differences suggests that there is a great deal more opportunity for the interested American civilian to actually do something about the oppression of the Palestinians. I believe that this is what lies behind much of the purpose behind the anti-Israeli-government propaganda that the Left has been pursuing for some time.

[Loknar]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2004, 12:39 AM
Arabs were living in Palestine long before the Israearseholes arrived from Egypt and started insisting on administering the place. And the Jews were a minute minority when the Zio****s arrived in 1948.

Why should the Palestinians have to give up their homeland because the Jews are not the original owners of any land?
actually the Israelites (Hebrews) migrated from modern day iraq, to present day Palestine, then to modern day egypt, then back to Palestine. The Canaanites were of the same origins as the Jews were (semetic) (oh the arabs are semetic too). Then the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, many Jews were taken as slaves and were dispersed every where. From North Africa they migrated to modern day morocco, then into Spain, then to t he Rhine river then to Poland where many fell victim to Hitler and a whole mess of other situations.


Don’t you think a Jewish homeland is needed? (not for religious, but ethnic Jews) They are hated by everyone.

[Guest1]

I&#39;m sorry guys, but I think I&#39;m gonna have to agree with LSD on this one. The fact is, while it is appreciated that attention is given to this cause, too much attention without intelligent analysis is now proliferating. That&#39;s leading to anti-Semitism, and that&#39;s not what we want.

The demonization is a problem I see alot here, unfortunately, and this thread is full of it.

Lucid, I expect you to explain your post, I have already reported you to the Admins.

There are other issues we need to worry about.

[The Sloth]

I&#39;m sure there is a good number of other issues that need to be addressed, but this particular one caught my attention first. I&#39;m sure as I raise my own awareness on these issues, I&#39;ll, sooner or later, address them too.

Although 1/7 Americans may support Palestinians, that is still fairly low considering that every American should support the Palestinians. It is even worse amongst the youth; since I attend high school, I notice these kids don&#39;t even know anything regarding the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and when they tell me they support Israel, I ask for a reason. Their answer is, "well, Palestinians are terrorists and it&#39;s apparent Israel is the victim."

I&#39;m sure most European nations do condemn Israel. It is a fact, however, that if I were to publicly denounce Israel, so many individuals would accuse me of anti-Semitism in America. It&#39;s not the case in Europe, however, but I think it&#39;s most important to reach true awareness amongst the Americans now. Like you said, this topic does get a lot of coverage, but the average, everyday normal American is only conscious of that, "there is a problem," and nothing else.

If I were to ask somebody if they knew about the U.N. resolutions against Israel, they would say..."did you get that information from the KKK? Because it&#39;s obvious you hate all Jews if you support terrorism against the Israelis." This popular coverage of the conflict is, apparently, meaningless in America.

[lucid]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 13 2004, 06:26 AM
Lucid, I expect you to explain your post, I have already reported you to the Admins.


The post with the picture? It speaks for itself.

[cubist]

reading this makes me sick,
to the zionists
if god gave you the land surely your god would have blocked anyone else from having it like he so valiently tried for a few thousand years in the precious old testemant, he destroyed the medianites cannanites tribes of asha gad dan so on and so fourth, infact he murdered more people than palestinian terrorists ever will

isreal need to stop they&#39;re war on terroism in order to stop terrorists its that simple, let go of the holy land as the majority of the world don&#39;t give a fuck how holy it is&#33;&#33;

the sanctity of human life is more important that the any religion or land

watching the news you see women saying "i blame the palestinians for the attack but the isrealies for shooting my 7 year old and killing his father too my life is ruined." for what a piece of land and bit of religious pride.

relgion is killing the people it thrives to protect, dent your pride and concede for the sake of human life

[cubist]

EDIT I AM A FUCKING IDIOT

[lucid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2004, 03:36 PM
anti semetic and muslim i hate all of them that utilise religion to kill eachother
mutha fuckers,

the picture to me doesn&#39;t need justifying its an opinion to which is very good i am not pro muslim but isreal are in the wrong, and the muslims are giong the wrong way about it too.
Can I get a translation please.

The picture is simply making fun of the fact that a lot of lefties think they are taking over all this land and kicking the arabs out.

*hint* It&#39;s pro-israel.

[cubist]

whoops *KICKS ASS REALLY HARD*

*ACKNOWLEGES THAT HE IS THE REAL BIG FUCKING IDIOT IN HERE*

buty leftists don&#39;t want to kick arabs out just like they don&#39;t want to kick jews out, they want to protect the proleteriat from exploitation

i want to kick religion out fullstop

[lucid]

As long as the Islamic extremists are strapping bombs to their kids so that they can specifically target innocent civilians I have no problem with Israel having a heavy hand. It&#39;s hard to feel bad for people that raise there children to hate other groups of people.

[cubist]

lucid i agree

the situation to me is that the palestinian cause they are fighting for is just, but the actions they have been taking are unjust, the isrealies have reacted justly to the actions taken by palestine but the isrealie actions will not resolve the issues that created the scenario. merely cuase another rection from palestine.

[Loknar]

i would for one like to see the un condem the palestinians for suicide bombings.



the palestinians can hav a state tomorrow, in 1 easy step&#33; DONT BLOW YOUR ASSES UP. it;s THAT simple.

[Guest1]

Lucid, I appologize, I thought you were being anti-Semitic instead of just plain stupid.

[Y2A]

I don&#39;t understand the logic behind the "The jews never should have taken the land in &#39;48 and thus the pals have every right to take it all back if they want". That is just plain stupid. The fact is that we can&#39;t turn back time. What is done is done. The best we can do now is try to insure a two state solution and advocate the absents of jewish settlements in the west bank and gaza.

[Intifada]

As long as the Islamic extremists are strapping bombs to their kids so that they can specifically target innocent civilians I have no problem with Israel having a heavy hand.

palestinian terrorism is a direct consequence of israeli oppression of palestinians. when israel treats palestinians like human beings, the suicide bombing will end.

[lucid]

The UN has showed that it is a worthless orginization. As far as I am concerned any group that appoints Iran to the head the Human Rights commission completely loses all credibility.

Unlike most of you I like foxnews. It is, just like any other media source. One reason I do like them is that sometimes they show balls and call it like it is. They where the first, and possibly only, of the major news outlet that called suicide bombers by there approriate name; Homicide bombers.

[Intifada]

what about the homicidal israelis?

[lucid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2004, 07:05 PM

As long as the Islamic extremists are strapping bombs to their kids so that they can specifically target innocent civilians I have no problem with Israel having a heavy hand.

palestinian terrorism is a direct consequence of israeli oppression of palestinians. when israel treats palestinians like human beings, the suicide bombing will end.
Thats complete bullshit. Your completely blind if you think the Palistinians want to live peacefully with the Israelis. They are led by religious fanatics that want them destroyed.

Who was being oppressed when Israel was in its infancy and was attacked by a huge Arab coalition. The Arabs are just pissed off that they keep getting their asses handed to them by a small country. A small country that actually has a economy and is productive.

I wonder if you would of taken Israels side at the beginning when they where being envaded over and over by there "friendly Islamic neighbors"?

[Intifada]

people who claim that palestinians are just attempting to kill all jews is completely dumb. for example the hebron massacre. the zionists were the ones who attempted to kill all the non-jews as soon as they went to palestine. there were many events of zionists attacking the indeginous people of palestine. the zionists were the ones attempting to drive the palestinians out of their land.

why was hezbollah formed? because israel invaded lebanon. hamas, part of another intifada, only became big after years of israeli support and funding.

israel demolishes palestinian homes much more frequently than palestinian suicide bombers kill israelis. the deaths on the palestinian side is not bigger than the deaths of israelis because israel is the more effective killer.

[lucid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2004, 07:51 PM
people who claim that palestinians are just attempting to kill all jews is completely dumb. for example the hebron massacre. the zionists were the ones who attempted to kill all the non-jews as soon as they went to palestine. there were many events of zionists attacking the indeginous people of palestine. the zionists were the ones attempting to drive the palestinians out of their land.

why was hezbollah formed? because israel invaded lebanon. hamas, part of another intifada, only became big after years of israeli support and funding.

israel demolishes palestinian homes much more frequently than palestinian suicide bombers kill israelis. the deaths on the palestinian side is not bigger than the deaths of israelis because israel is the more effective killer.

On Friday, August 23, 1929, that tranquility was lost. Arab youths started throwing rocks at the yeshiva students. That afternoon, one student, Shmuel Rosenholtz, went to the yeshiva alone. Arab rioters later broke in and killed him, and that was only the beginning.


Rabbi Slonim, who had tried to shelter the Jewish population, was approached by the rioters and offered a deal. If all the Ashkenazi yeshiva students were given over to the Arabs, the rioters would spare the lives of the Sephardi community. Rabbi Slonim refused to turn over the students and was killed on the spot. In the end, 12 Sephardi Jews and 55 Ashkenazi Jews were murdered.


When the massacre finally ended, the surviving Jews were forced to leave their home city and resettled in Jerusalem. Some Jewish families tried to move back to Hebron, but were removed by the British authorities in 1936 at the start of the Arab revolt. In 1948, the War of Independence granted Israel statehood, but further cut the Jews off from Hebron, a city that was captured by King Abdullah&#39;s Arab Legion and ultimately annexed to Jordan.

Why did Israel invade Lebanon? Maybe because there where PLO training camps that where training terrorists to attack Israel. Then a Palestinian terrorist group tried assassinating and Israeli Ambasador. So the IDF bombed "PLO" BASES and AMMUNITION DUMPS in Beruit (Hint: Military Targets). Your sweet and innocent arabs friends replied with Artilery and Mortar attacks aimed at the Israeli population. Big surprise there.

[Intifada]

The Massacre at Baldat al-Shaikh (Dec. 31, 1947)
As the world was preparing to usher in a new year AD, Hagana gang members stormed the village of Baldat al-Shaikh (referred to by the Zionists today as Tell Ghanan) in pursuit of unarmed citizens. This Zionist-led crime led to the deaths of numerous women and children, the death toll coming to approximately 600 people, most of whose corpses were found inside the houses of the village.



The Massacre at Sa&#39;sa&#39; in Hebron (the night of Feb. 14-15, 1948)
The Zionists attacked the village at midnight, exploding 20 houses with the unarmed citizens who had fled into them for refuge still inside. Most of the victims were women and children.



The Massacre at Abu Kasr (March 31, 1948)
This massacre was carried out by terrorists from the Hagana gang, which subsequently become the nucleus of the Zionist Army. The massacre occurred during an armed attack and a series of explosion operations. The Zionist terrorists pursued the unarmed citizens inhabiting the village as they attempted to flee from their homes.


The Massacre at Dair Yasin (April 10, 1948)
The Zionist gangs Stern, Irgun and Hagana raided the Arab village of Dair Yasin at 2:00 a.m. According to eyewitnesses, the terrorist members of the Zionist gangs began killing everyone within shooting range. After this they began throwing bombs inside the houses to destroy them along with everyone in them, since they had received orders to destroy all the homes in the village. As the houses were being bombed, terrorists from Irgun and Stern followed behind those throwing the explosives, killing everyone who remained alive inside the demolished houses.
The Zionist massacre continued until the afternoon of the same day. Before withdrawing from the village, the terrorists gathered together everyone from the village who remained alive and executed them, including elderly people, women and young children.
In describing the massacre, eyewitnesses recounted that "a bride and groom at their final wedding celebration were the first victims. First they were thrown down along with thirty-three of their neighbors, then they were stood up against a wall and pelted with machine-gun fire with their hands tied."
Fahmi Zaydan, the only person in his family to survive the massacre, was twelve years old at the time. He recounts what happened to the rest of his family, saying, "The Jews ordered everybody in my family to stand up with their faces to the wall. Then they started opening fire on us. I was wounded in my side. Most of us kids managed to survive because we hid behind our families. But a bullet shattered the head of my sister Qadriya, who was four years old, and everybody else who was standing along the wall was killed, too: my mother and father, my grandmother and grandfather, my maternal aunts and uncles, and some of their kids."
According to Halima Id, who was thirty years old at the time of the massacre and from one of the largest families in Dair Yasin, "I saw a Jew shoot my brother&#39;s wife, Khaldiya, in the neck. She was about to give birth. Then he slashed her stomach open with a butcher knife. And when one of the women tried to get the baby out of the dead mother&#39;s womb, they killed her too. Her name was Aisha Radwan."
In another house, Hanna Khalil (16 years old at the time) saw a Jewish terrorist unsheathe a large knife and use it to slit open the body of her neighbor, Jamila Habash, from head to toe. Then he killed another neighbor belonging to a family by the name of Fathi in the same manner on the doorstep of the same house.
The same sorts of atrocities were repeated in one house after another. And according to details obtained from survivors, female Jews belonging to the organizations Layhi and Etsel also took part in the massacre. Jacque de Renee, head of the Red Cross mission in Palestine in 1948, described the terrorists who carried out the massacre at Dair Yasin saying, "They were young men and teenagers, male and female, bristling with arms (pistols, machine guns and hand grenades). [When I saw them], most of them were still spattered with blood, with huge daggers in their hands. A girl from one of the Jewish gangs whose eyes looked as though they were still full of the crime, held out her hands still dripping with blood, swinging them back and forth as they were some sort of war medal."
He adds, "I went into one house and found it full of shattered furniture and splinters of all sorts . .. When I was about to leave the place I heard the sound of moaning and sighing. As I looked for the source of the sound, I stumbled upon a small, warm foot. It belonged to a ten-year-old girl who had been maimed by a hand grenade, but who was still alive. When I began to pick her up, an Israeli officer tried to prevent me, but I pushed him out of the way&#33; Then I continued my work. No one had been left alive except for two women, one of them an elderly woman who had hidden behind a pile of firewood. Of the 400 inhabitants of the village, forty escaped. The rest were slaughtered, indiscriminately and in cold blood."
Menachem Begin, former Prime Minister of the Zionist entity, boasts about this massacre in a book of his, where he writes, "This operation had tremendous, unanticipated results. After hearing the news of Dair Yasin, the Arabs were panic-stricken and began fleeing in terror. Out of a total of 800,000 Arabs who had been living in the land of present-day Israel (the Palestinian territories which were occupied in 1948), only 165,000 remained." And Begin finds fault with Jewish leaders who declared themselves innocent of the massacre, accusing them of hypocrisy&#33;
Begin goes on to say that the massacre at Dair Yasin "brought about decisive victories on the battle field." Other terrorists have said that "without Dair Yasin, it would not have been possible for Israel to come into existence." As for &#39;[the terrorist gangs] Etsel and Layhi, they continued to defend the massacre. In fact, Layhi considered what its members had done at Dair Yasin "a humanitarian duty".



The Massacre at Abu Shousha (May 14, 1948)
The massacre in the village of Abu Shousha, not far from Dair Yasin, began at dawn. It resulted in fifty victims, including men and women, elderly and very young, many of whom had had their heads beaten with axes. The soldiers of the Zionist Jaf&#39;ati brigade which carried out the massacre opened fire indiscriminately on everything that moved. Not even the livestock survived the massacre.


Terrorism in Military Strategy Against Arab Nations (http://www.palestine-info.co.uk/am/publish/article_48.shtml)

[Loknar]

ihatebush


ever herd of the grand mutfi?

[Intifada]

loknar, ever heard of the gush emunim underground or the TNT?

[Louis Pio]

A small country that actually has a economy and is productive.


LOL&#33; :D

In your world everything is caused by envy or what? Man I never laughed so much. True the palestinians are being used by different fanatics for their own aims. But if they had a decent life none of them would. The palestinians are being fucked so of course they react. But in your oppinion everybody should just shut up and look to your shinning example or what?

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Brooklyn&#045;[email protected] 12 2004, 02:52 AM
By the way, doesn&#39;t the Torah mention that the Jews are supposed to wait for their homeland, and probably suffer during this time, until their Messiah comes down and grants this homeland to them?
No.


Who is their Messiah?

Elijia the prophet will announce his arrival. The messiah is unknown


Is Ralph Bunche, the one that negotiated the deal to get the Jews into Palestine, the Jewish Messiah?
No, and if he claimed he was the messiah he
A) Is a megalomaniac
B) Would have be executed in ancient Israel for being a false prophet


Probably not, so what are the Jews doing there ahead of Him?
As Hillel said: "If I am not for myself, then who will be for me?"

[LSD]

people who claim that palestinians are just attempting to kill all jews is completely dumb. for example the hebron massacre. the zionists were the ones who attempted to kill all the non-jews as soon as they went to palestine. there were many events of zionists attacking the indeginous people of palestine. the zionists were the ones attempting to drive the palestinians out of their land.


There are fanatics on both sides.

I think everyone can agree that the murder of innocent civilians is wrong, no matter who&#39;s doing it.


why was hezbollah formed? because israel invaded lebanon. hamas, part of another intifada, only became big after years of israeli support and funding.

...um....what??

hamas, part of another intifada, only became big after years of israeli support and funding.

...right.......



israel demolishes palestinian homes much more frequently than palestinian suicide bombers kill israelis. the deaths on the palestinian side is not bigger than the deaths of israelis because israel is the more effective killer.

If by "more effective" you mean with less collateral death, than isn&#39;t that to be encouraged rather than critisized.

Not to encourage murder, but if one can minimize the death of civilians one should.



But none of that is really the issue. Israel may well be doing much that is worthy of critisizm.....but not this much.

Not to repeat myself, but the attention given to this issue borders on the insane. We are talking about a nation the size of Rhode Island. The numbers of deaths, while tragic, pale in comparison with the amount that die every day in dozens of other places around the world. The so-often attacked policies of Israel may well be dispicable but they are nothing in comparison with those of China or those of Saudi Arabia or those of Colombia.

Israel has done some terrible things, but there are governments on earth that dwarf these crimes a hundred fold, many of them within several miles of Israel&#39;s border. Some focus, some critisizm is deserved, but the current level defies logic.

The cry that such attention is warrented because it is neccessary to overcome the "media bias" is equally ludicrous. Yes, there is a bias in the American media, but show me an issue in which there isn&#39;t&#33; Show me a controversial subject in which the media doesn&#39;t take a side, subtle or not. Such a bias is a part of the American press, like it or not. Trying to fight it is admirable, but fighting it on one subject is short-sighted at best, dangerous at worst.

Israel has coverage. Over the years the American media has spend more time and more money on Israel/Palestine than on any other foreign policy issue since the Second World War. People know what&#39;s going on, the broad strokes at least.

Someone here complained that High School Kids don&#39;t understand the details of the issue, and that&#39;s sad. But they know about it.

How many of them know anything about the Sudan or the Congo?
How many of them know about the Kurds?

Protests fill the streets on the issue of Israel on a near monthly basis, television and radio shows discuss it ad nauseum.

The information is out there, which can not be said for most of the issues in the world today.

Millions are murdered every day, thousands are imprisoned and tortured by represseive states.
And Israeli scientists are "boycotted" to "pressure" Israel.

Who&#39;s "pressuring" China?
Who&#39;s "pressuring" Colombia?

There is indeed a bias here but it is not the press&#39;.

To ignore Israel would be unethical, but to ignore everything else is more so. To concentrate on a issue that is so relatively unimportant while expecting "others" to bring up the rest is both lazy and immoral.


Get off the bandwagon people, there are more than enough on it already.

[synthesis]

LSD - did you read my last post?

You may have missed the point I was trying to make, which is that Israel simply seems like a more feasible target for change than others.

Honestly, if you consider that the Israeli government continues in its barbarism through all the criticism that has been placed upon it, all that which you have listed - what hope does there appear to be for changing the situation in other countries? Especially China?

I also think that your point that awareness of Israel exists misses the mark. The idea is to educate people as to the extent of Israel&#39;s crimes, as well as the fact that they exist.

Many Americans simply accept the fact that there are "bad" governments out there, and don&#39;t want to get involved in what they feel is a futile effort. You can tell them all the different corrupt Latin American governments, but they will simply accept this as fact.

The Israeli situation is different, however, because you have something to go with. Since most Americans, as you said, are at least aware of the strife and often some of the history of the conflict, anyone seeking to convince them of the situation is already one step ahead of where they would have been without the prior information.

I do think it&#39;s a shame that the effort must be one of practicalism rather than idealism, and you have convinced me to some effect that the fixation on Israel is partially based in subconscious laziness. I simply wish to lay out the motives for the criticism of the Israeli government.

[LSD]

You may have missed the point I was trying to make, which is that Israel simply seems like a more feasible target for change than others.

In this respect you&#39;re actually probably right.

Unfortuneatly most of the effort is not going into the avenues that take advantage of this fact. Israel as both a democracy and as a major recipient of foreign aid is indeed in the situation that it can be influenced.

But boycotts and endless UN resolutions aren&#39;t the way to do it.

Such brute-force measures, such as they are, are more effectively targeted against those governments which are unresponsive to more subtle alternatives.

I&#39;m not suggesting that no effort should go into convincing Israel to sanity, but I am suggesting that a more even approach would be more likely to gain a success somewhere.



Honestly, if you consider that the Israeli government continues in its barbarism through all the criticism that has been placed upon it, all that which you have listed - what hope does there appear to be for changing the situation in other countries? Especially China?

The amount of effort targeted at Israel is not succeeded in changing its policies, whereas it is indeed possible that another country would be more responsive. China may not be the prime canditate but it isn&#39;t the only criminal out there by far...


I also think that your point that awareness of Israel exists misses the mark. The idea is to educate people as to the extent of Israel&#39;s crimes, as well as the fact that they exist.

Many Americans simply accept the fact that there are "bad" governments out there, and don&#39;t want to get involved in what they feel is a futile effort. You can tell them all the different corrupt Latin American governments, but they will simply accept this as fact.

The Israeli situation is different, however, because you have something to go with. Since most Americans, as you said, are at least aware of the strife and often some of the history of the conflict, anyone seeking to convince them of the situation is already one step ahead of where they would have been without the prior information.

A full 15% of Americans support the Palestinian cause, it&#39;s not much but it&#39;s something.

There should still be work on trying to inform as many as possible, but that can be done with half of the effort being put in now.

Americans may "accept...as fact" that there are "bad governments", but that will never change unless we actively convince them that they can change that.


I do think it&#39;s a shame that the effort must be one of practicalism rather than idealism, and you have convinced me to some effect that the fixation on Israel is partially based in subconscious laziness. I simply wish to lay out the motives for the criticism of the Israeli government.

I know that most people who focus on Israel are not doing it out of malevolence or racism, it&#39;s simply the "big issue" on the left.

I would say that an effort needs to be put into not only informing the general public but also many on the left. The more that are involved in a cause, the more information is available and the more that hear about it. If more became involved in other causes, the same would occur.

[Intifada]

There are fanatics on both sides.

I think everyone can agree that the murder of innocent civilians is wrong, no matter who&#39;s doing it.


i agree, but the western media only covers the palestinian extremists.


hamas, part of another intifada, only became big after years of israeli support and funding.


yes. back when the PLO and arafat were the bad guys.

Hamas history tied to Israel (http://www.upi.com/print.cfm?StoryID=18062002-051845-8272r)



If by "more effective" you mean with less collateral death, than isn&#39;t that to be encouraged rather than critisized.


by more effective i meant the better murderer.

the fact is israel never tries to limit "collateral" damage. israel knows that its actions are going to kill innocent palestinians yet they do not care, as long as they kill the suspected terrorists.

good article (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/C3994F6B-9576-4702-94E3-73EA1470182E.htm)