Israel

[Question everything]

Okocim, if you want to discuss Zionism do it here so I can kick your ass in a proper debate. Thanks. ;)

[chimx]

I want to discuss Zionism, and have a fun debate about it! Lets start with the socialist roots of the Zionist movement. What are your thoughts on socialist Zionism? Its history of working with Arabic peoples, its opposition to capitalism and exploitation, etc.?

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by chimx+April 21, 2007 10:25 am--> (chimx @ April 21, 2007 10:25 am)I want to discuss Zionism, and have a fun debate about it! Lets start with the socialist roots of the Zionist movement. What are your thoughts on socialist Zionism? Its history of working with Arabic peoples, its opposition to capitalism and exploitation, etc.?[/b]
Well the activities of todays Zionists are not funny.This stie Middle East archive (http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/mideast/index.htm) from encycl;opedia of trotskyism online gives a good deal of materials about the actions of the Isralei ruling class.



What are your thoughts on socialist Zionism? Its history of working with Arabic peoples, its opposition to capitalism and exploitation, etc.?

IS review has a good analysis on this. (http://www.isreview.org/issues/04/zionism_false_messiah.shtml).

The socialism propagated by the early Zionists is really comparable to pseudo-socialism espoused by Pan Arabist. It has nothing common aim with Communists. It allied with Imperialism speaks a lot about its "opposition" to capitalism



from that article
Zionism and the Holocaust

During Israel's many wars with the Arab states, Israeli leaders accused Arab states of desiring a "new Holocaust." Leading Zionists regularly called critics of the Israeli state's repression of the Palestinians "anti-Semites," likening them to the Nazi murderers of 6 million Jews. Zionists consciously use this sort of emotional blackmail to silence any critics of Israeli policies. "I repress the urge to shout 'Shut up, already' in the White House press room when [former Israeli Prime Minister] Menachem Begin toasts an American president with a 15-minute lecture on the meaning of the Holocaust," said a Holocaust survivor and supporter of peace with the Palestinians. "Must every thought of compromise conjure up the threat of appeasement at Munich?"33

From their attacks on their political opponents, one might think that the Zionists stood up to Hitler and the Holocaust. But the history of Zionists' inaction and their dealings with the Nazis makes a mockery of their use of the Holocaust as a political weapon.

A few months after Hitler came to power, the leading German Zionist organization sent Hitler a long memo offering formal collaboration with the Nazis. This stomach-turning memo reads, in part:

On the foundation of the new state, which has established the principle of race, we wish to fit our community into the total structure so that for us too, in the sphere assigned to us, fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible...

For its practical aims, Zionism hopes to be able to win the collaboration even of a government fundamentally hostile to Jews, because in dealing with the Jewish question no sentimentalities are involved but a real problem whose solution interests all peoples, and at the present moment especially the German people.34

At the time, collaboration meant that leading organizations of Zionism worked to undermine a worldwide anti-German boycott called to protest the Nazis' anti-Semitism. Instead, the World Zionist Organization worked out a "Transfer Agreement" by which money from German Jews could be sent to Palestine to finance imports into Germany. Meanwhile, inside Germany, the Nazis shut down all socialist and Jewish resistance organizations and arrested their leaders. But the Nazis allowed the Zionists to operate. An American Zionist leader confessed his embarrassment: "It was a painful distinction for Zionism to be singled out for favors and privileges by its Satanic counterpart [Nazi Germany]."35

Throughout the 1930s and the Second World War, Zionists always placed the interests of Palestine ahead of fighting anti-Semitism in Europe. Seeking allies against Britain, the Zionist militia, the Haganah, negotiated for support from the German SS. In one secret meeting in Haifa in 1937, Haganah agent Faviel Polkes told the SS's Adolph Eichmann that "Jewish nationalist circles are very pleased with the radical German policy, since the strength of the Jewish population would be so far increased" and overwhelm the Palestinians. For a period in the late 1930s, the Nazis allowed Polkes to set up Haganah recruiting and training camps inside Germany. For a period of time, Polkes' sole income was "secret funds from the SS."36 The Zionists impressed Eichmann. Years later in exile in Argentina, he recalled "I did see enough to be very impressed by the way the Jewish colonists were building up their land. I admired their desperate will to live, the more so since I was myself an idealist. In the years that followed I often said to Jews with whom I had dealings that, had I been a Jew, I would have been a fanatical Zionist. I could not imagine being anything else. In fact, I would have been the most ardent Zionist imaginable."37 This is the man who oversaw Hitler's Final Solution!

Thousands of Jews, including the rank and file of Zionist groups, resisted Hitler's attempt to herd them into death camps. Zionists united with Communists and Bundists in the 1943 armed uprising against the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto. But even at the Holocaust's height, Jewish Agency leaders and settler leaders in Palestine offered little help. "The disaster facing European Jewry is not directly my business," said Ben-Gurion in 1943. Zionist leaders believed the fight in Europe diverted them from their main task: building the Jewish state in Palestine. The chairman of the Jewish Agency's committee refused to divert Jewish Agency funds from Palestine into rescuing Europe's Jews. "They will say that I am anti-Semitic, that I don't want to save the Exile, that I don't have a warm Jewish heart" said Yitzhak Gruenbaum at a 1943 Jewish Agency meeting. "Let them say what they want. I will not demand that the Jewish Agency allocate a sum of 300,000 or 100,000 pounds sterling to help European Jewry. And I think that whoever demands such things is performing an anti-Zionist act." During the war, the Agency spent far more money to acquire land in Palestine than to mount rescues.38

Preserving the "remnant" of Jewry for transfer to Palestine, rather than saving the Jews, guided Zionist leaders. Ben-Gurion opposed a plan to allow German Jewish children to emigrate to Britain in 1938. To justify himself, Ben-Gurion said: "If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them to [Israel], then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children but also the history of the people of Israel."39 Unfortunately, plans like the British proposal to rescue Jewish children, were few. In general, Western governments turned their backs on Jews fleeing Germany. In one celebrated case, the U.S. Coast Guard in 1939 turned away a ship, the St. Louis, carrying more than 900 refugees wishing to emigrate to the U.S. Until several European countries agreed to accept the refugees, they were destined to return to Germany--and to certain death. Still, American Zionist organizations refused to press for abolishing immigration restrictions which prevented Jews fleeing Germany to move to the U.S. Only the Left--the Trotskyist Communist League and the Communist Party--called for the lifting of all restrictions on Jewish immigration.

The wartime actions of some Zionist leaders came back to haunt them. In 1952, Malchiel Gruenwald, an Israeli hotel operator who lost 50 members of his family in the Holocaust in Hungary, accused Dr. Rudolph Kastner of collaborating with the Nazis. Kastner, a prominent Labor Party politician and spokesman for the Israeli Ministry of Commerce and Industry, sued Gruenwald for libel. The subsequent trial, which became known as the "Kastner affair," exposed a sordid history of deal making between the Zionists and the Nazis. Kastner had been the head of the Jewish Agency in Hungary, the leading Zionist representative in that country during the war. He had cut deals with leading Nazis, including Eichmann and SS officer Kurt Becher, to win passage of Jews to Palestine. But as a leader of the Jewish community in Hungary who knew about Hitler's "Final Solution," he helped send far more Jews to their deaths. He even appeared as a witness for the defense of Becher at the postwar Nuremberg Trials of Nazi war criminals. Gruenwald charged:

[Kastner] wanted to save himself, so that Becher would not reveal to the international court their deals and their joint acts of robbery...Where now is the money of the Jews of Hungary, millions of which no accounting was given?...He saved no fewer than fifty-two of his relatives, and hundreds of other Jews--most of whom had converted to Christianity--bought their rescue from Kastner by paying millions! That's how Kastner saved the members of Mapai [the Israeli Labor Party]...He saved people with connections, and made a fortune in the process.40

In the end, the court decided that some of Gruenwald's charges were true, but that others were unproved. Yet, the court did not want to take upon itself the judgment of Kastner's actions during the war. It left that to a government board of inquiry. Many in Israel's elite realized that an investigation would expose dozens of leading Israeli politicians with skeletons similar to Kastner's in their closets. A former Israeli secret service agent saved the government the embarrassment of an investigation when he assassinated Kastner in 1957. In 1993, the Tel Aviv City Council voted to name a street in Kastner's honor.

[Revolution Until Victory]

forget everything bad about the zionist colony: Aprtheid, racism, terrorism, brutality, torture, daily killing and kidnapping of Palestinains, uprooting of treas and homes etc.
imagine if the zionist colony was the most peaceful entitiy on earth; more peaceful than the vatican itself.
imagine the zionist colony had no army, didn't kill, torture, or kidnapp over half a million Palestinains. Would the zionist colony be ok??
the answer is a big fat NO

if we were to delete all of "Israel's" terror and evils, the zionist colony would still be horrible and illegitamte for the simple reason of being built on the lands, properties, ruins, blood, and expense of another people.
so if the zionist colony didn't do anything wrong, it would still be illegitamite.

The so-called state of Israel is built on the expense of the Palestinains:

- The CCP Refugee Office ( a UN commitee) estimated that although only a little more than a quarter was considered cultivable, more than 80 percent of Israel's total area of 20,850 km.sq. represented land abandoned by the Arab refugees. Three-quarters of the former Arab land was sub-marginal land or semi-desert in the Negeb.
(The Establishment of the State of Israel as a Jewish State from Chapter I in: Israel –An Apartheid State, by Uri Davis, Zed Books, London and New Jersey, 1987)

- According to the Survey of Palestine prepared by the UN prior to the 1947 partition plan, P.566, over 94% of Palestine's total area is owned by arabs, and the zionists own 5.8% of the entire area of Palestine.

- Subcommittee 2 of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestine Question stated in its report to the United Nations General Assembly the following:

Closely connected with the distribution of population is the factor of land ownership in the proposed Jewish State. The bulk of the land in the Arab State, as well as in the proposed Jewish State, is owned and possessed by Arabs. This is clear from the following statistics furnished to the Sub-Committee by the United Kingdom representative, showing the respective percentages of Arab and Jewish ownership of land in the various sub-districts of Palestine.
(Official Records of the Second Session of the General Assembly Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestine Question, Summary Records of Meetings, 25 September-25 November, 1947, pp. 292-293.)

- Ben-Gurion himself stated that Palestine bleongs to the Palestinain people. In a UNCCP document dated July 4, 1947, oral evidence were presented at a public meeting were Ben-Gurion was present. Ben-Gurion was discussing the “disparities between Jews and Arabs” in Palestine. He stated:

“I shall mention only a few [referring to the disparities between Arabs and Jews]. There is the disparity in numbers. There are some 600,000 Jews in Palestine and some 1,100,000 Arabs. There are no reliable figures in this respect. There is an even greater disparity than that. The Arabs own 94% of the land, the Jews only 6%. The Arabs have seven States, the Jews none..."
( this UNCCP document could be found online at http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7735b7...1?OpenDocument) (http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7735b7dc144807b985256e8b006f4a71?OpenDocument))

so the zionist colony is illegitamte even if we to ignore all of its terrorism from its inception until this very day.
the zionist colony should be replaced by a secular democratic PALESTINE where jew and arab could live equally and peacfully with equal rights.
Yasir Arafat described this in a biography written by journalist Alan Hart:

We were saying “no” to the Zionist state, but we were saying “yes” to the Jewish people of Palestine. To them we were saying, “You are welcome to live in our land, but on one condition - You must be prepared to live among us as equals, not as dominators.”

[Question everything]

This won't be any fun with out Okocim, everybodys Favorite Zionist!!! ;)

[50cal_words]

As a genuine question, what do you think of israel(in particular, its founding)? was it a mistake, was the way it was done a mistake? was it the best thing ever done? I particularly think, the idea was great, how they did it was unbelievably stupid and now the israeli governement is the american governement.

[Vargha Poralli]

Well a topic already exists in this forum just some few threads below here (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=65616)

And another thread can be found Here (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=64428&hl=Israel)


I particularly think, the idea was great,

Yes creating an nation out of pure Racism which never took any concern about the Palestinians who were already living there,didn&#39;t give a shit about their own people when they were butchered by the Nazi&#39;s, an Apartheid form of government which has the worst Human rights record in the history,murders it own people commits aggression against it neighbor and performs ethnic cleansing was a great idea <_<

I have provided some links in the first thread I have linked that shows the true history of the Zionism.

[Phalanx]

Yes creating an nation out of pure Racism which never took any concern about the Palestinians who were already living there

Maybe he was talking about the idea of a Jewish state, not necessarily in Palestine. You have to clarify what they said before flying off into a rage.

The Zionists who had ties to the Nazis were very few in number, but leftists love exploiting this little fact, regardless of how historically unimportant they were.



an Apartheid form of government which has the worst Human rights record in the history,


Ok, now you&#39;re just being absolutely stupid.


murders it own people

Umm, what?


true history of the Zionism.

Sounds like your history of Zionism has just as much credibilty as the Holocaust revisionists.

[Demogorgon]

I think with the benefit of hindsight (though t should have been obvious the too) that the best thing to have done would have been for Britain to get out of Palestine and let it have its independence with the understanding that it would not try to close its borders to Jewish people. There was no reason why Jewish and Palestinian people could not have continued to live together as they had before the west decided to stir up the pot.

These days though, we have a nasty apartheid state oppressing millions of people and holding its neighbours to ransom, backed by America and by its own nuclear weapons. Something obviously has to change. I hope the Israeli left and their Palestinian brothers and sisters can deal with this as soon as possible and basically start again. I wuld hate for it to come to the "two state solution" though even that would be better than what we have now.

[Phalanx]

I think with the benefit of hindsight (though t should have been obvious the too) that the best thing to have done would have been for Britain to get out of Palestine and let it have its independence with the understanding that it would not try to close its borders to Jewish people. There was no reason why Jewish and Palestinian people could not have continued to live together as they had before the west decided to stir up the pot.

I don&#39;t think there would&#39;ve been peace even if Britain allowed all refugees to come to Palestine. The Arab leadership in Palestine was feeling threatened by the waves of Jewish refugees even before statehood was discussed.

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2007 10:08 pm

I think with the benefit of hindsight (though t should have been obvious the too) that the best thing to have done would have been for Britain to get out of Palestine and let it have its independence with the understanding that it would not try to close its borders to Jewish people. There was no reason why Jewish and Palestinian people could not have continued to live together as they had before the west decided to stir up the pot.

I don&#39;t think there would&#39;ve been peace even if Britain allowed all refugees to come to Palestine. The Arab leadership in Palestine was feeling threatened by the waves of Jewish refugees even before statehood was discussed.
And right they were to feel threatened as it turned out. Had things gone differently though, tensions would have died down had it become clear the Jewish settlers did not intend to oppress the Palestinians.

The fact that they did, not Arab worries, is the source of the present conflict.

[Phalanx]

The fact that they did, not Arab worries, is the source of the present conflict.

Not at all. Arab leaders weren&#39;t interested in the least about the plight of the Palestinians, but viewed Israel as a threat to their power in the region. Nasser didn&#39;t care about the Palestinians, and Abdullah of Jordan certainly didn&#39;t either. What mattered to them was the potential security threat of Israel.

[Coggeh]

The only positive that i can see in the establishment of the Israeli State is the Kibbutzim (which actually helped the Zionist regime grow) so im not quite sure is it a positive anymore .lol

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2007 10:44 pm
The only positive that i can see in the establishment of the Israeli State is the Kibbutzim (which actually helped the Zionist regime grow) so im not quite sure is it a positive anymore .lol
would it still seem "positive" to you if you learned those kibutz were built on stolen Palestinain lands??

[inquisitive_socialist]

well, if you think about how this would play out in any other situation (i.e time,place) im pretty sure that it wouldnt. if in this day and age you tried to force a nation to become basically another nation entirely, it would fail

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2007 03:28 am

Yes creating an nation out of pure Racism which never took any concern about the Palestinians who were already living there

Maybe he was talking about the idea of a Jewish state, not necessarily in Palestine. You have to clarify what they said before flying off into a rage.


Well in your Zionist eyes this part could have missed


I particularly think, the idea was great, how they did it was unbelievably stupid and now the israeli governement is the american governement.



The Zionists who had ties to the Nazis were very few in number, but leftists love exploiting this little fact, regardless of how historically unimportant they were.
But the Zionists like you love to bury the truth and use Holocaust to justify the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.





an Apartheid form of government which has the worst Human rights record in the history,


Ok, now you&#39;re just being absolutely stupid.

Prove that I am with facts.




murders it own people
Umm, what?

What what ?




true history of the Zionism.
Sounds like your history of Zionism has just as much credibilty as the Holocaust revisionists.

Godwins Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_Law)

Could you ever justify the actions of Israel without pulling in this Nazi and Holocaust card ?

[Phalanx]

now the israeli governement

That doesn&#39;t prove anything. Israel could&#39;ve been anywhere in the world.


But the Zionists like you love to bury the truth and use Holocaust to justify the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

No, I&#39;ll admit it, but the facts remain that those that had ties to Nazis were very minimal and weren&#39;t crucial in the creation of Israel.


Prove that I am with facts.

Rwanda, Bosnia, Nazi Germany, Attila the Hun, Francisco Pizzaro, Hernan Cortes, Chinghis Khan, Saddam Hussein, Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, North Korea, many, many others. If you believe Israel has a worse human rights record than any of those, you are not worth debating.


What what ?

When did the State of Israel murder its own people?


Could you ever justify the actions of Israel without pulling in this Nazi and Holocaust card ?

A Jewish state was a necessary action in response to global anti-Semitism. Not necessarily on the land of Palestine or Uganda, but land set aside for a homeless people is completely legitimate. Nothing you say could dispute that.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2007 03:13 pm
No, I&#39;ll admit it, but the facts remain that those that had ties to Nazis were very minimal and weren&#39;t crucial in the creation of Israel.
now that is just plain stupid.
those zionist jews who collaborated with the Nazis and the Facists at the same time their brothers were being killed in concentration camps, were not just unimportant indiviual zionists or something, it was the leading orgnizations and leaders that collaborated.

"Mussolini set up squadrons of the Revisionist Zionist youth movement, Betar, in black shirts in emulation of his own Fascist bands.

When Menachem Begin became chief of Betar, he preferred the brown shirts of the Hitler gangs, a uniform Begin and Betar members wore to all meetings and rallies - at which they greeted each other and opened and closed meetings with the fascist salute.

Simon Petilura was a Ukrainian fascist who personally directed pogroms which killed 28,000 Jews in 897 separate pogroms. Jabotinsky negotiated an alliance with Petilura, proposing a Jewish police force to accompany Petilura’s forces in their counter-revolutionary fight against the Red Army and the Bolshevik Revolution - a process involving the murder of peasant, worker and intellectual supporters of the revolution."

I think you do realize who Begin and Jabotinsky were?

"The Zionist Federation of Germany sent a memorandum of support to the Nazi Party on June 21, 1933. In it the Federation noted:

... a rebirth of national life such as is occurring in German life ... must also take place in the Jewish national group.

On the foundation of the new [Nazi] state which has established the principle of race, we wish so to fit our community into the total structure so that for us, too, in the sphere assigned to us, fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible ...

Far from repudiating this policy, the World Zionist Organization Congress in 1933 defeated a resolution calling for action against Hitler by a vote of 240 to 43.

During this very Congress, Hitler announced a trade agreement with the WZO’s Anglo-Palestine Bank, breaking, thereby, the Jewish boycott of the Nazi regime at a time when the German economy was extremely vulnerable. It was the height of the Depression and people were wheeling barrels full of worthless German Marks. The World Zionist Organization broke the Jewish boycott and became the principal distributor of Nazi goods throughout the Middle East and Northern Europe. They established the Ha’avara, which was a bank in Palestine designed to receive monies from the German-Jewish bourgeoisie, with which sums Nazi goods were purchased in very substantial quantity."

what was it again? "unimportant" :blink:

[Okocim]

Mazel tov&#33; Happy 59th birthday Israel&#33; :D



now what was we arguing about...?

[Question everything]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 08:31 pm
Mazel tov&#33; Happy 59th birthday Israel&#33; :D



now what was we arguing about...?
Israel.

it sucks :P

[ichneumon]

the zionist colony should be replaced by a secular democratic PALESTINE where jew and arab could live equally and peacfully with equal rights.
Yasir Arafat described this in a biography written by journalist Alan Hart:

personally, i favor the one-state solution with a hardline tito-esque dictator. it worked for yugoslavia...

[Question everything]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 09:31 pm

the zionist colony should be replaced by a secular democratic PALESTINE where jew and arab could live equally and peacfully with equal rights.
Yasir Arafat described this in a biography written by journalist Alan Hart:

personally, i favor the one-state solution with a hardline tito-esque dictator. it worked for yugoslavia...
And what exactly happened when Tito died...?

[norwegian commie]

Did i miss something here?
Do we actually have zionist&#39;s that claims to be on the revolutionary left?

That is unaxeptable. Well it proves my point of religion being oppresice though.

Imperialism is the highest form of capitalism.

I know a family of palestinian refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the zionist state. Unaxeptable, and if you support that then you are no better that the Pinichet-supporters.

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by norwegian [email protected] 25, 2007 12:02 pm
Did i miss something here?
Do we actually have zionist&#39;s that claims to be on the revolutionary left?

That is unaxeptable. Well it proves my point of religion being oppresice though.

Imperialism is the highest form of capitalism.

I know a family of palestinian refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the zionist state. Unaxeptable, and if you support that then you are no better that the Pinichet-supporters.
I know a family of Cuban refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the communist state.

What say you?

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by pusher [email protected] 25, 2007 08:04 pm
I know a family of Cuban refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the communist state.

What say you?
So Cuba is now ruled by Godless Communist who were from ...

.....From Mars ?

Your comparison is shittiest I have ever seen.

[luxemburg89]

I know a family of Cuban refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the communist state.

What say you?

HURRAY&#33;

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 05:08 pm

I know a family of Cuban refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the communist state.

What say you?

HURRAY&#33;
You are a beacon of compassion.

[luxemburg89]

You are a beacon of compassion.

And you are a knob - i don&#39;t think we&#39;d have a long-lasting relationship so you can stop the chat up lines :P

lots of love, lux :D

[50cal_words]

What I meant in the beginning (and accidentaly said particularly instead of personally) was that the idea of creating a state for the Jewish people to live in was a great idea. What wasnt was that they took palestinian land to do so and evicted thousands of people. On top of it, the Jews were on a list of many(now disregarded) societies promised land for their people.

[KC]

I repeat: the creation of a state based on race is never a good idea.

[KickMcCann]

I think it is important to remember that Zionism is a complicated, mulitfaceted ideology, not some monolithic, uniform hammer that came crashing down on the Palestinians in 1948; to think such a thing is no different than assuming that Stalinism is the standard of Socialism and Communism everywhere.
The truth is, Zionism has a complicated internal history, with lots of internal fighting between widely diverse camps over control of the movement and its direction. Just like in any movement, one or two camps eventual win and assume control, while all the others fade from memory like branches cleaved off an ideological tree.
The victors in the fight to control Zionism were the right-wing fascist types in the Stern Gang and the bourgois centrists like Ben Gurion and Weizmann. But there were groups opposed to their hostile takeover and overt racism against the Palestinians, one Zionist group called Brit Shalom wanted a secular one-state with equal rights for Jews and Arabs. But they had no guns to put up a fight in the war, and no real support from the majority of Zionists and Palestinians who were just itching for an all-out war to settle the buisness once and for all.
History is written by the winners, but we should always look back to the beginnings of things like Zionism and the Soviet Union and realize what they could&#39;ve been. That been said, a Jewish homeland or protectorate isn&#39;t that bad of an idea just as long as the respect human rights.

[50cal_words]

I generally agree with zampano, but in this circumstance I&#39;m going to have to say it was at least an okay idea. Not because of the holocaust, which people seem to NEVER forget, but because if they didnt, the jewishrace would complain like three year olds. Not to say at the time this wasnt justified. And not to say not all of them where like that, just enough of them. This is unlike the races(and not religions) that are still on hold. My friend is hounding me to add the words &#39;fuzzy bunnies&#39; to my post...enjoy&#33;

[KC]

Not because of the holocaust, which people seem to NEVER forget, but because if they didnt, the jewishrace would complain like three year olds.

Yeah, that&#39;s a great reason&#33; :rolleyes:

[Okocim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 04:33 pm
I generally agree with zampano, but in this circumstance I&#39;m going to have to say it was at least an okay idea. Not because of the holocaust, which people seem to NEVER forget, but because if they didnt, the jewishrace would complain like three year olds. Not to say at the time this wasnt justified. And not to say not all of them where like that, just enough of them. This is unlike the races(and not religions) that are still on hold. My friend is hounding me to add the words &#39;fuzzy bunnies&#39; to my post...enjoy&#33;
does no one else noticed the racist undertones of this post?


and FYI, the Balfour declaration was signed in 1917, before the Holocaust. Nice try though. :rolleyes:

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 05:20 am
I think it is important to remember that Zionism is a complicated, mulitfaceted ideology, not some monolithic, uniform hammer that came crashing down on the Palestinians in 1948; to think such a thing is no different than assuming that Stalinism is the standard of Socialism and Communism everywhere.
The truth is, Zionism has a complicated internal history, with lots of internal fighting between widely diverse camps over control of the movement and its direction. Just like in any movement, one or two camps eventual win and assume control, while all the others fade from memory like branches cleaved off an ideological tree.
The victors in the fight to control Zionism were the right-wing fascist types in the Stern Gang and the bourgois centrists like Ben Gurion and Weizmann. But there were groups opposed to their hostile takeover and overt racism against the Palestinians, one Zionist group called Brit Shalom wanted a secular one-state with equal rights for Jews and Arabs. But they had no guns to put up a fight in the war, and no real support from the majority of Zionists and Palestinians who were just itching for an all-out war to settle the buisness once and for all.
History is written by the winners, but we should always look back to the beginnings of things like Zionism and the Soviet Union and realize what they could&#39;ve been. That been said, a Jewish homeland or protectorate isn&#39;t that bad of an idea just as long as the respect human rights.
I&#39;m sorry my friend, but your kind of contradicting yourself here.
Hertzel, the zionist leader, from the very begning was very cleary about his plans to expell the arabs and establish his settler-colony. No question about it, in every movement, you would find conflicting views. In Zionism, and at the very begning, Ben-Gurion wasn&#39;t as nazi towards the Palestinains. He recognized they exists, but still believed they were savages that weren&#39;t entitled to their land. Also, at the very begning, Ben-Gurion wasn&#39;t thinking about expelling the Palestinains, but latter, of course, he changed his mind and saw "nothing immoral" in it. Another zionist who was in conflict with the others was Ahad Ha&#39;am (spelling) at a times when zionists were going around barking "a land with out a people for a people with out a land", Ahad opned their eyes and insisted that Palestinains do exist. He also rejected the way the zionists colonizer were treating the native Palestinains.

"But there were groups opposed to their hostile takeover and overt racism against the Palestinians, one Zionist group called Brit Shalom wanted a secular one-state with equal rights for Jews and Arabs."

now, here you clearly contradict yourself. If a movement was calling for a secular one-state with equal rights for jews and arabs, then it is NOT ZIONIST anymore&#33;&#33;
(of course, if we assume zionsim is the establishment of a jewish state in Palestine)
so, no, there was NO movments in zionism that were calling for justice, since the ONLY justice is the inhabitants of Palestine, the majority of which are arabs, gain their freedom and Independece in a secular democratic state were jew and arab would get their equal rights.

[EwokUtopia]

I think that there was a need for a Jewish homeland (as well as a Roma homeland), but Palestine was a particularly bad and half-assed selection for its location. There were too many innocent people there to create an ethnocentric state without displacing them (an unjustifyable act no matter how you spin it).

A better selection would have been former East Prussia. If you know your world war II history, after the war, the Germans ceded this territory, and it is now divided between Poland and the Russian Federation. Why do the Russians need any more land? They have enough already, and being as they are the worlds largest natio, this is absurd. The Kaliningrad Oblast is where the Jewish state should have been, and there is really no movement of Germans to take it back, except from the far-right, and who gives dick all to what they have to say. It is as big as Palestine, t is connected to the sea, and it is fertile land, it would have been perfect, and if this happened, history would have taken a much more peaceful course.

But no, it had to be Palestine due to half-assed religious and historical excuses. The jews are there, and they should not be forced to leave, but having a Jewish State in Palestine is simply not right. It needs to be a state where Jews and Palestinians, as well as all the other people who live there, are equals and neither oppresses the other. This means:

-Turn all the land into one single multiethnic entity
-Change the ethnocentric flag, currency and anthem and give the state two names (Yisrael and Filasteen)
-grant all Palestinians the right to return to the land
-destroy the wall/fence, and create viable infrastructure across the entire country and accessable to all.
-establish normalized relations with neighbouring states
-end all economic priveleges held by the Israeli and Palestinian ruling classes and evenly distribute the wealth to economically equalize Jews and Palestinians
-grant Palestinians the right to live anywhere in what is called Israel, and grant Jews the right to live in West Bank/Gaza, under legal, neighbourly and equal terms
-work to dismantle religious extremism on both parts
-recognize that the land belongs neither to Jews nor Arabs, Druze nor Bedouins, Armenians nor Samaritans, but all who call it their homes.


This is a long process, and it will not happen overnight, but this is the goal the global community, and especially Israeli&#39;s and Palestinians should seek. This is essentially also the goal that every Palestinian I have ever met has said they want for their children and grandchildren.

Eventually, the different ethnicities will intermarry and a new cultural entity will emmerge, this is a hopeful future.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 06:18 pm
-Turn all the land into one single multiethnic entity
-Change the ethnocentric flag, currency and anthem and give the state two names (Yisrael and Filasteen)
-grant all Palestinians the right to return to the land

your missing a very important point. Aside from the communist view, accoding to International law and offical statistics, Palestine does actually belong to somone.
Palestine belongs to the arab muslim and christain Palestinians, except for 5.8% leggally purchased by the zionists. (I have given the evidence and statistics in many earlier posts)

The zionist settler colony should be dismantled and replaced by a seclur-democratic PALESTINE were jew and arab would live in equal rights. That is actually the Palestinian demand.
However, the land shouldn&#39;t be called Israel and Palestine. There is really no need to.
Before the zionist takeover and colonization, that area was called Palestine.
So originally, the area was called Palestine, what right do the zionists have to alter its name???
After all, Palestine belongs to the Palestinains, and they have a rigth to name it whatever they like.

The Palestinain can call it Palestine since it:
- was the origianal name before colonziation
- They own the land

what do the zionist have from the above conditons?? ZERO.

putting the name "Israel" would mean the idea of Zionism still got some legitamicy, which we all know it doesn&#39;t&#33;
Zinonsim, the idea of establishing a state on someone else&#39;s expense, lands, and blood should be eliminated; completely.

[ichneumon]

I think that there was a need for a Jewish homeland (as well as a Roma homeland), but Palestine was a particularly bad and half-assed selection for its location. There were too many innocent people there to create an ethnocentric state without displacing them (an unjustifyable act no matter how you spin it).

the next time the UN starts handing out homelands, could you be sure to CC me the memo? cause DAMN, 1 - gay homeland, 2 - intellectual homeland. &#39;nuff said.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 26, 2007 06:46 pm
your missing a very important point. Aside from the communist view, accoding to International law and offical statistics, Palestine does actually belong to somone.
Palestine belongs to the arab muslim and christain Palestinians, except for 5.8% leggally purchased by the zionists. (I have given the evidence and statistics in many earlier posts)

The zionist settler colony should be dismantled and replaced by a seclur-democratic PALESTINE were jew and arab would live in equal rights. That is actually the Palestinian demand.
However, the land shouldn&#39;t be called Israel and Palestine. There is really no need to.
Before the zionist takeover and colonization, that area was called Palestine.
So originally, the area was called Palestine, what right do the zionists have to alter its name???
After all, Palestine belongs to the Palestinains, and they have a rigth to name it whatever they like.

The Palestinain can call it Palestine since it:
- was the origianal name before colonziation
- They own the land

what do the zionist have from the above conditons?? ZERO.

putting the name "Israel" would mean the idea of Zionism still got some legitamicy, which we all know it doesn&#39;t&#33;
Zinonsim, the idea of establishing a state on someone else&#39;s expense, lands, and blood should be eliminated; completely.
Firstly, land ownership is a huge problem in the world today, and we need to start taking steps to see that with in 50-100 years, no such concept exists. Owning land meand deprivation of land from other people.

Secondly, since this can only be achieved peacefully, we cant just disregard the fact that millions of jews call it their home as well. And when I say it may only be done peacefully, I mean that Israel (as with any other nuclear state) can not be defeated militarily, and the closest thing to victory which can be achieved is a lose-lose situation. Palestinians must continue resisting the occupation, and some anti-occupation riots among Israeli&#39;s would be extremely nice as well, but when it comes down to it, you can not simply say that the land belongs to the Palestinians, and the Jews are only allowed to live there if they recognize that. That would alienate Israeli&#39;s from having an equal secular state with the Palestinians, and if this happens, the state wont. We need support from both camps to make this happen, and though today I side with Palestine, if tommorow, the situation were reversed, and the Israeli&#39;s were living under occupation, my allegiance would shift. I would expect any opponents of oppression to say the same.

We have to stop trying to rebuild the past and start focussing on rebuilding the future. Historical rights aside, the situation as it is is that some 5 million Jews, 12-15 million Arabs, and another few 100,000 more Druze, Armenians, Roma, and Bedouins call this land their home. And this land is home to all, and all need to have their rights defended, especially those whose rights are under attack (hence my support for Palestine).

When it comes down to it, the secular state is only a temporary solution. We need to build towards a stateless future, and realize that while our culture will be recorded and live in that way, time changes all cultures, and time kills all nationality.

One Simple Fact: In a 500 years at the very latest, every nationality and ethnic group that we divide ourselves up into will cease to exist. What will exist is up to us, and the steps we begin to take today.

So fuck land ownership, thats the root of this conflict in the first place, Zionists claiming to own the land. Lets not fight fire with fire.

[wtfm8lol]

In a 500 years at the very latest, every nationality and ethnic group that we divide ourselves up into will cease to exist.

i agree with this because south park said so.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 08:17 pm
the next time the UN starts handing out homelands, could you be sure to CC me the memo? cause DAMN, 1 - gay homeland, 2 - intellectual homeland. &#39;nuff said.
Did the UN not hand them Palestine, with aid from the British Empire?

This was a shitty move on all parts. They could have done much better. They possibly picked one of the worst places to go around kicking people out of their homes to create an ethnocentric state. Its very location just tidilates Jewish and Christian religious extremism, and thats why Palestine was chosen. Bad choice.

[Question everything]

Originally posted by norwegian [email protected] 25, 2007 12:02 pm
Did i miss something here?
Do we actually have zionist&#39;s that claims to be on the revolutionary left?

That is unaxeptable. Well it proves my point of religion being oppresice though.

Imperialism is the highest form of capitalism.

I know a family of palestinian refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the zionist state. Unaxeptable, and if you support that then you are no better that the Pinichet-supporters.
there is Ocokim and a bunch of cappie trolls stuck in OI (no offence Patton, you are fine but some of these guys are messsed up&#33;&#33;&#33;)

[Question everything]

Originally posted by pusher robot+April 25, 2007 05:14 pm--> (pusher robot &#064; April 25, 2007 05:14 pm)
[email protected] 25, 2007 05:08 pm

I know a family of Cuban refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the communist state.

What say you?

HURRAY&#33;
You are a beacon of compassion. [/b]
There are personal storys everywhere I try to listen to them, but if you want to pull that "have some compassion" shit on me you should at least look at what Bastilica did.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 12:15 am
Secondly, since this can only be achieved peacefully, we cant just disregard the fact that millions of jews call it their home as well. And when I say it may only be done peacefully, I mean that Israel (as with any other nuclear state) can not be defeated militarily.
so???
millions, in fact hunreds of millions of French called Algeria their homeland during French colonization. Can we say, "the only solution is a secular democratic state were the Algerian and the French would live equally and call it Algeria France"
NO&#33; that&#39;s bullshit.
can we say, Spain should be called "Spain Andalus" since millions of arabs call it their homeland???
it doesn&#39;t matter what a bunch of lunatics want to call a specific place. it is not they who decide.
those who own the land decide. Palestinain own the land. (and I have posted the long evidence over a thousand times, but I will repost them if you would like to)
calling the land "Israel Palestine" will NOT end the conflict, since it would mean zionism, a war crime and a racist ideology, is still not defeated.

many nations as powerful were defeated by dedicated guerillas and freedom fighters.
Vietnam, Algeria, Indonesia Africa against European colonization etc.

even if the zionist coloy will only be defeated peacefully, that doesn&#39;t mean the name of the land can&#39;t exculde "Israel"

"Israel" is the result of a racist, impearialist, colonial ideaology.
any one who wants "Israel" in the name means he supports oppression and colonialism.
and jews will be permitted to live with arabs, only on one condition, they have to live as equals not as dominators.
those who want to opress and live as dominatiors will not be welcome.

[EwokUtopia]

millions, in fact hunreds of millions of French called Algeria their homeland during French colonization.

There have never even been 100 million french people in the entire world, let alone in Algeria, you are making an extreme exaturation, besides, as far as I am aware, they never colonized Algeria in massive numbers like what has been done in Canada, the US, Austrailia, New Zealand, and recently Palestine. But, if the few French people who actually lived there wished to stay in Algeria, they have every right to do so, as long as their status as colonial overlords is abolished, and they do not live in a state of privelege over anyone else in the country, which is what I am saying of the Israeli&#39;s, but with the difference in the manner of colonialism.
I am a White Canadian, should I pack my bags and go to Europe? We stole this land in a manner which was infinately worse than the way that the Zionists stole Palestine, indeed, the genocide of the indigenous peoples of the America&#39;s is probably the worst one in human history, yet should I, the decendant of European workers initially brought here for cheap labour, be forced from the land I call my home? I do believe that I do have the duty to own up to the unjust legacy my people have created, but making all non-indigenous people leave, or live in a country specifically governed only by indigenous people is absurd. I am all for the de-whiteification of Canada, but this does not mean harm to whites any further than ending white privelege and everything it entails.
In Palestine, Jewish privelege should be ended, but they have the right to live there, and call it whatever the fuck they want. We do not want to start a war over the name of the country, this is ridiculous. Do you honestly think that if equality was given, and Palestinian rights were restored, that they would give a fuck what their Jewish neighbours call the land? This is the stupidest, and most irrelevant point in the entire conflict, the name of a country is not important. The oppression and racism that occurs in that name is what must be abolished.


can we say, Spain should be called "Spain Andalus" since millions of arabs call it their homeland???

Spain Andalus? you mean Al-Andalus? I hate to break it to you, but the Arabs who live in Spain were not born any time near the time of existance of Al-Andalus, but if a Spanish Arab wished to call it Al-Andalus, they would have every right to do so, especially given the brutal manner in which the Andalucian Moors were forced from their homeland.
Im not saying we should call the country "Israel Palestine", Im saying that the two words should be used interchangably, like "Holland" and "The Netherlands" for instance. Try getting the 5 million Israeli&#39;s to up and call their country a different name...this will create so much resistance to the end of occupation and oppression, and the full restoration of Palestinian rights, that such a thing would be impossible. You are not being reasonable, and for the record, Palestinian friends of mine have said that it really doesnt matter what the Israeli&#39;s call the country as long as they allow Palestinians full equal rights, the right of return, and the dismantlement of the colonialization process.


Palestinain own the land. (and I have posted the long evidence over a thousand times, but I will repost them if you would like to)
They do not own the land. They have the right to the land, and historically they owned the land, but currently, Israeli&#39;s own most of the land. This is not a political statement, just a fact of the world today. We must do everything in our power to undermine Israeli ownership of this land, but the solution wouldnt be to replace Israeli ownership with the ownership of another specific ethnic group. The solution is to place equal land ownership in all people who call this land their home (which, as I have stated, is not just Israeli&#39;s and Palestinians). This is one step into the ultimate goal of abolishing the concept of land ownership altogether.


many nations as powerful were defeated by dedicated guerillas and freedom fighters.
Vietnam, Algeria, Indonesia Africa against European colonization etc.

even if the zionist coloy will only be defeated peacefully, that doesn&#39;t mean the name of the land can&#39;t exculde "Israel"


I fully agree that Israel is a racist imperialist colony. So is the USA, Austrailia, New Zealand, and my home (I have known no other home) of Canada. Israel shares much more with these colonies than the examples that you have cited. It is not simply a remote colony of economic exploitation. It is a Lebensraum colony. Yet, I dare say that many if not most Israeli people, as with most people of every ethnicity and nationality, are good people, and can be reasoned with, and given the nature of Israeli colonialism, dismantling the racist state is a much more delicate matter, and given that it is a nuclear power, all out war is the last thing anybody should do. The Guerilla warfare will not topple it to the point where the Palestinian flag flies over Tel Aviv, and all Israeli&#39;s call it Palestine, this is just simply impossible, and if you deny this than you are absolutly removed from reality. It can however topple the state to the point where the people of Israel and Palestine are able to create a new, multi-ethnic state of both names, with equal rights to all, and even this is only a stepping stone to the goal of all revolutionaries, which is a world without borders, nations, or land ownership.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 01:54 am

millions, in fact hunreds of millions of French called Algeria their homeland during French colonization.

There have never even been 100 million french people in the entire world, let alone in Algeria, you are making an extreme exaturation, besides, as far as I am aware, they never colonized Algeria in massive numbers like what has been done in Canada, the US, Austrailia, New Zealand, and recently Palestine. But, if the few French people who actually lived there wished to stay in Algeria, they have every right to do so, as long as their status as colonial overlords is abolished, and they do not live in a state of privelege over anyone else in the country, which is what I am saying of the Israeli&#39;s, but with the difference in the manner of colonialism.
I am a White Canadian, should I pack my bags and go to Europe? We stole this land in a manner which was infinately worse than the way that the Zionists stole Palestine, indeed, the genocide of the indigenous peoples of the America&#39;s is probably the worst one in human history, yet should I, the decendant of European workers initially brought here for cheap labour, be forced from the land I call my home? I do believe that I do have the duty to own up to the unjust legacy my people have created, but making all non-indigenous people leave, or live in a country specifically governed only by indigenous people is absurd. I am all for the de-whiteification of Canada, but this does not mean harm to whites any further than ending white privelege and everything it entails.
In Palestine, Jewish privelege should be ended, but they have the right to live there, and call it whatever the fuck they want. We do not want to start a war over the name of the country, this is ridiculous. Do you honestly think that if equality was given, and Palestinian rights were restored, that they would give a fuck what their Jewish neighbours call the land? This is the stupidest, and most irrelevant point in the entire conflict, the name of a country is not important. The oppression and racism that occurs in that name is what must be abolished.


can we say, Spain should be called "Spain Andalus" since millions of arabs call it their homeland???

Spain Andalus? you mean Al-Andalus? I hate to break it to you, but the Arabs who live in Spain were not born any time near the time of existance of Al-Andalus, but if a Spanish Arab wished to call it Al-Andalus, they would have every right to do so, especially given the brutal manner in which the Andalucian Moors were forced from their homeland.
Im not saying we should call the country "Israel Palestine", Im saying that the two words should be used interchangably, like "Holland" and "The Netherlands" for instance. Try getting the 5 million Israeli&#39;s to up and call their country a different name...this will create so much resistance to the end of occupation and oppression, and the full restoration of Palestinian rights, that such a thing would be impossible. You are not being reasonable, and for the record, Palestinian friends of mine have said that it really doesnt matter what the Israeli&#39;s call the country as long as they allow Palestinians full equal rights, the right of return, and the dismantlement of the colonialization process.


Palestinain own the land. (and I have posted the long evidence over a thousand times, but I will repost them if you would like to)
They do not own the land. They have the right to the land, and historically they owned the land, but currently, Israeli&#39;s own most of the land. This is not a political statement, just a fact of the world today. We must do everything in our power to undermine Israeli ownership of this land, but the solution wouldnt be to replace Israeli ownership with the ownership of another specific ethnic group. The solution is to place equal land ownership in all people who call this land their home (which, as I have stated, is not just Israeli&#39;s and Palestinians). This is one step into the ultimate goal of abolishing the concept of land ownership altogether.


many nations as powerful were defeated by dedicated guerillas and freedom fighters.
Vietnam, Algeria, Indonesia Africa against European colonization etc.

even if the zionist coloy will only be defeated peacefully, that doesn&#39;t mean the name of the land can&#39;t exculde "Israel"


I fully agree that Israel is a racist imperialist colony. So is the USA, Austrailia, New Zealand, and my home (I have known no other home) of Canada. Israel shares much more with these colonies than the examples that you have cited. It is not simply a remote colony of economic exploitation. It is a Lebensraum colony. Yet, I dare say that many if not most Israeli people, as with most people of every ethnicity and nationality, are good people, and can be reasoned with, and given the nature of Israeli colonialism, dismantling the racist state is a much more delicate matter, and given that it is a nuclear power, all out war is the last thing anybody should do. The Guerilla warfare will not topple it to the point where the Palestinian flag flies over Tel Aviv, and all Israeli&#39;s call it Palestine, this is just simply impossible, and if you deny this than you are absolutly removed from reality. It can however topple the state to the point where the people of Israel and Palestine are able to create a new, multi-ethnic state of both names, with equal rights to all, and even this is only a stepping stone to the goal of all revolutionaries, which is a world without borders, nations, or land ownership.
first of all, I repeat, get out of the communist view of land ownership for a second just for the sake of argument.
think of what is acceptable today of land ownership.

I&#39;m sorry, I was exagerating and had no idea of the real number of French people, but my point is, there were French people both in France and in Algeria who thought of Algeria as their homeland. Can we, at the time after the end of colonization, call Algeria "France Algeria" or both France and Algeria like holland and netherland??
I&#39;m not arguing wether French people can live in Algeria. that is beyond question, of course they can, given the fact they stop being colonizers and dominators of course. But since the French are illegitmate colonizers and invaders, they don&#39;t have the right to OFFICALY change the name of Algeria. I&#39;m not arguing what the people whould call it personally. I&#39;m talking officaly. Hell, anyone can name anything, any name he likes.

"In Palestine, Jewish privelege should be ended, but they have the right to live there, and call it whatever the fuck they want."

of course they do. Again, I&#39;m talking of how the name of the state should be officaly called.

"Spain Andalus? you mean Al-Andalus? I hate to break it to you, but the Arabs who live in Spain were not born any time near the time of existance of Al-Andalus,"

who the hell suggested this??
imagine if the arab start immegrating in huge numbers to Spain, start killing poeple like the zionists did, and declare a state on over 78% of Spain called Andalus. After 60 yrs, the Andalus would be dismantled, could the Arabs in Spain there, say the OFFICAL name of Spain should be Spain-Andalus??
no, since they would simply be invaders.

"Try getting the 5 million Israeli&#39;s to up and call their country a different name...this will create so much resistance to the end of occupation and oppression, and the full restoration of Palestinian rights, that such a thing would be impossible. You are not being reasonable, and for the record, Palestinian friends of mine have said that it really doesnt matter what the Israeli&#39;s call the country as long as they allow Palestinians full equal rights, the right of return, and the dismantlement of the colonialization process."

if it was THEIR country, no, I wouldn&#39;t try to force them to change its name. But since the French colonizers can&#39;t officaly change the name of Algeria, neither can the Zionsits. For the record, I&#39;m a Palestinain my self, And not one Palestinain I know of or even heard of would accept to have the name of the colony OFFICALY in the name of the state.

"They do not own the land. They have the right to the land, and historically they owned the land, but currently, Israeli&#39;s own most of the land. This is not a political statement, just a fact of the world today."

really?? so the US can mabye now invade Mexico and say "the Mexican people don&#39;t own the land. They have the right to the land, and historically they owned the land, but currently, Americans own most of the land. this is not a political statment, just a fact of world today"?? NO
an invader DOESN&#39;T own the land.
I guess I have to post the evidence again for the thousand time:

- The CCP Refugee Office (a UN offical commitee) estimated that although only a little more than a quarter was considered cultivable, more than 80 percent of Israel&#39;s total area of 20,850 km.sq. represented land abandoned by the Arab refugees. Three-quarters of the former Arab land was sub-marginal land or semi-desert in the Negeb.

- According to the Survey of Palestine P.566 prepared by the UN prior to the 1947 partition plan, over 94% of the entire area of Palestine belongs to Palestinains; zionists own 5.8%

- Subcommittee 2 of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestine Question stated in its report to the United Nations General Assembly the following:
Closely connected with the distribution of population is the factor of land ownership in the proposed Jewish State. The bulk of the land in the Arab State, as well as in the proposed Jewish State, is owned and possessed by Arabs. This is clear from the following statistics furnished to the Sub-Committee by the United Kingdom representative, showing the respective percentages of Arab and Jewish ownership of land in the various sub-districts of Palestine.


"The Guerilla warfare will not topple it to the point where the Palestinian flag flies over Tel Aviv, and all Israeli&#39;s call it Palestine, this is just simply impossible, and if you deny this than you are absolutly removed from reality."

I never said this. Peopoles war and armed struggle will be able to topple the state and dismantle zionism. In no way did I claim, Guerilla warfare would force the "israelis to call it Palestine"
making the jewish inhabitants to shed their colonial ID and call the land by its true and legitmatie name can never be done by the point of the gun. It should be conducted through awarnece and explaining to them the issue, not through warfare.

"Yet, I dare say that many if not most Israeli people, as with most people of every ethnicity and nationality, are good people, and can be reasoned with"

btw, those zionist colonizers are as "good" as the European colonizers in Algeria, Australia, Congo, Norh America, Angola, South Africa, just to name a few; No difference what so ever. If you think the illgeitamte European colonizers were "good" then you defenetly think the zionists colonizers are. :)
however yes I agree, you can still of course reason with them like any other people.
but no "good" people on the face of earth would chose to be colonizers. ;)

In conclusion, to mention the name, officaly, of the zionist colony in the secular democratic state means Zionism still got some legitmacy.
I will go back to the example of Algeria. Could the French colonizers right after the end of their colonization of Algeria, demand that the Algerian state be called "France Algeria"?? of course not. They are invaders. Giving the land, officaly, the name the invaders chose for it is the same as giving legitamcy to the invaders and their colonialism and opression. You think any Algerian would take them seriously?? no Algerian would accept that. Why should an invader have a right to alter the name of the land he invaded?

do the zionists own the land?? no. then why do they have the right to change it?
Palestinains own the land, not the Zionists, and only the Palestinains can change the name of their homeland, not a bunch of inavders and theifes.

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by Question everything+April 27, 2007 12:47 am--> (Question everything @ April 27, 2007 12:47 am)
Originally posted by pusher [email protected] 25, 2007 05:14 pm

[email protected] 25, 2007 05:08 pm

I know a family of Cuban refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the communist state.

What say you?

HURRAY&#33;
You are a beacon of compassion.
There are personal storys everywhere I try to listen to them, but if you want to pull that "have some compassion" shit on me you should at least look at what Bastilica did. [/b]
Finally, somebody got my original point.

Reasoning by anecdote is silly.

[ichneumon]

i vote for calling it "Canaan" and cloning Tito to rule it.

[EwokUtopia]

I&#39;m sorry, I was exagerating and had no idea of the real number of French people, but my point is, there were French people both in France and in Algeria who thought of Algeria as their homeland. Can we, at the time after the end of colonization, call Algeria "France Algeria" or both France and Algeria like holland and netherland??
I&#39;m not arguing wether French people can live in Algeria. that is beyond question, of course they can, given the fact they stop being colonizers and dominators of course. But since the French are illegitmate colonizers and invaders, they don&#39;t have the right to OFFICALY change the name of Algeria. I&#39;m not arguing what the people whould call it personally. I&#39;m talking officaly. Hell, anyone can name anything, any name he likes.

The Example is flawed however...the French never called Algeria anything but Algeria. If anything, the borders of Algeria should be dismantled at once because they are the remnants of European Imperialism. Same goes for all of the Arab World, Africa, Latin America, et cetera. Many of these borders are not based on any cultural boundaries, but are mainly imposed to keep these people weak, when united they should be strong. Ever hear of Bolivarianism?


I&#39;m talking of how the name of the state should be officaly called.
You must be sure to stay realistric. If you go around saying Israel should be completely dismantled and a Palestinian state should be put in its place, this will drive Israeli&#39;s away from a multi-ethnic state, and if the people of Israel are driven away from this cause, more and more of them will be driven to Zionism, and Zionism will grow more powerful.
If however you go around promoting a secular, ethnically neutral state, you will find more and more Israeli&#39;s who oppose zionism standing up in their country and opposing the war. Discontent at home mixed with attrition in the occupied zones is the surest way to see the end of the occupation within the next decade. This will be a slow process, all meaningful change is slow, but if you go around asking too much too fast, you can fuck up the whole process. We cant change the world overnight, if we could, we would have done it by now. We need to be patient, and have a clear and realistic strategy. If you demand the complete abolition of all things Israel, you drive more and more Israeli&#39;s to Zionism, and the task becomes harder, and so does life for Palestinians.


really?? so the US can mabye now invade Mexico and say "the Mexican people don&#39;t own the land. They have the right to the land, and historically they owned the land, but currently, Americans own most of the land. this is not a political statment, just a fact of world today"?? NO
an invader DOESN&#39;T own the land.

We have misunderstood eachother here. What I meant was that the Israeli&#39;s control the land, and even if they have no right to do so, this is a simple fact. Through violence and guerilla warfare, the best that could possibly be done is forcing the end of the occupation (at the hands of a huge amount of innocent Palestinian lives), and create a 2-state solution, which I assume you do not accept as a viable solution, as it still cedes most of Palestine to the racist colonial entity.
Any invasion of "Israel Proper" would fail at best, and at worst provoke a nuclear responce, which could well drag the world into a nuclear war...this is bad...very bad.
We must work with Israeli&#39;s. Not with zionists, but you must remember that not every Israeli is a zionist, even if they are a product of zionist colonialism. We must not work with the Israeli government either, they are self-serving zionists who are even more responsible than the settlers. We must work with dedicated Israeli people, many of whom oppose the rape of Palestinian rights that their government does, as I oppose the rape of indigenous rights my government does (and for the record, I would be more than happy to call my area by the name the Anishinabe people used, that is Nogajiwanong).

One problem with your arguement is that I dont think you fully realize what kind of colony Israel is, it is not like Algeria, or Vietnam, which were primarily economic colonies of France. It is an ethnoreligious Lebensraum, which means that you must not be brash, or think you can win militarily. The Israeli&#39;s are leaving as much as White Americans, Canadians, or Austrailians are, they are the same type of colony, and I am ashamed to bear that legacy, but it is just a fact of history, and we can not change the past. Palestine is the deciding point of whether or not humanity has changed at all (and therefore is ready for revolution of any sort), and we all must see to it that Israel does not follow the same genocidal path that Canada and the US have, which unfortunately it seems to be doing. You can not outgun them, you can cripple them economically through attrition, but this must be combined with Palestinians reaching out to Israeli activist groups to spread mass discontent within the Israeli people, which is the only way I can think that will end the occupation.

If you have a better strategy, please tell me, I am all ears, and open to suggestion. We need to stop looking to the past and look to the future instead.




I do see what you are saying. It is a valid point, but you must remember that the name isnt the biggest issue here. End the occupation, End the settlements, restore the right of return, destroy the wall, equalize rights, then the debate on semantics can begin. Right now we are well ahead of ourselves.

[Revolution Until Victory]

"The Example is flawed however...the French never called Algeria anything but Algeria. If anything, the borders of Algeria should be dismantled at once because they are the remnants of European Imperialism. Same goes for all of the Arab World, Africa, Latin America, et cetera. Many of these borders are not based on any cultural boundaries, but are mainly imposed to keep these people weak, when united they should be strong. Ever hear of Bolivarianism?"


No, EwokUtopia, the French colonizers used to call their colony "France Algeira" or "French Algeria" they even kept stressing this fact and saying "ther is no such thing as &#39;Algeria&#39; only France Algeria"
the point is, hundreds of thousands of French colonizers in Algeria (not 100 of millions :D) and millions of other French in France used to call the colony their homeland. Should Algeria change its name after the end of French colonialism, coz a bunch of colonila racist dogs want to??
I have told you more than once, forget about those ideals for the moment for the sake of argument. Forget about the revolutionary view of land ownership, states, and the like. think of what is now acceptable. Of course I don&#39;t want to see Algeria or any other arab state in this situation. Do you realize how humiliating it is, to live your life according to how the racist colonial scum wanted you to live 80 years ago?
every day is a humilation. I 100% reject how the colonizers divided the arab world and Latin America and 100% support the Unification of Latin America and the Arab world.

"You must be sure to stay realistric. If you go around saying Israel should be completely dismantled and a Palestinian state should be put in its place, this will drive Israeli&#39;s away from a multi-ethnic state, and if the people of Israel are driven away from this cause, more and more of them will be driven to Zionism, and Zionism will grow more powerful.
If however you go around promoting a secular, ethnically neutral state, you will find more and more Israeli&#39;s who oppose zionism standing up in their country and opposing the war."

when you demand a secluar-democratic state for all its citezens with equal rights called "Palestine Israel" or something along those lines, your surrendering to injustice, opression, zionism, and colonialism. Those people that demand the name "Israel" be mentioned in the secular state are already turning to zionism; if I demand calling the state Paelstine, I wouldn&#39;t be driving those who reject this to zionism, they already are.
If you think the goal of the Palestinain liberation movement is to liberate only the arab masses from zionist coloniailms you would be really mistanken. The goal of the Palestinian armed struggle and revolution is total liberation of man and land: a secular democratic PALESTINE; the liberation of "man", in other words, the liberation of BOTH arab AND jew, from colonialims and imperialism. IF the jewish people of Palestine are still not letting go of their zionist and colonial ID by demanding to change Palestine&#39;s name, then the Palestinian revolution have not acheived its goals yet. there will be no acceptance whatsoever of zionism and colonialims; changing Palesine&#39;s name is a major surrender to colonialism and will not solve the conflict.
What I&#39;m promoting, and what the Palestinains have been demanding since the begning, is a secular-democratic state with equal rights for its citezens. The Palestinains demand a TOTAL end of zionist colonialims, oppresion, racism, and impearialims. Having the name "Israel" means colonialims haven&#39;t been defeated yet. The only reason the name of a palce or a state should be changed or have 2 names is if there is 2 different people in it with equally legitamite claims.
In the case of Palestine, the zionists do not have a legitatmite claim; the Palestinains do. Changing the name of Palestine means we are giving creadit to colonialims; means colonialism is still alive. whether we mean it or not, changing Palestines name to include "Israel" means we recognize that zionism and its colonialism is legitamtie.

"One problem with your arguement is that I dont think you fully realize what kind of colony Israel is, it is not like Algeria, or Vietnam, which were primarily economic colonies of France. It is an ethnoreligious Lebensraum, which means that you must not be brash, or think you can win militarily. The Israeli&#39;s are leaving as much as White Americans, Canadians, or Austrailians are, they are the same type of colony, and I am ashamed to bear that legacy, but it is just a fact of history, and we can not change the past."

no I do realize the difference between the European colonies in Africa, the case of Vietnam etc and between Israel, US, Australia.
I realize Zionist colonialims is a much delicate, complex, and diffecult issue.
and that&#39;s why I look to the South African example as an inspiration since it&#39;s much more closer to the zionist colony than Vietnam or any where else.
In South Africa, like the zionist colony, the colonizers set up a state for themselves, and offered the orginial and true owners of the land Bantustans.
Aprtheid South Africa was extremely powerful and also a Nuclear power. Yet, it was dismantled and distroyed. Now please don&#39;t tell me it was dismantled not with Geurilla warfare but with sanctions and isolation. Sanctions were only a part of the issue. But it have been proven that Geurilla warfare, was not just a factor, but the major one in dismantiling this colony. What the South African achieved could be repeated by the Palestinains. no reason to think otherwise. So yes, armed struggle, peopels war, and revolutionary violence can achieve beautiful things.

"The Israeli&#39;s are leaving as much as White Americans, Canadians, or Austrailians are, they are the same type of colony"

first of all, no one advocated the jewish people of Palestine should leave. But you have to be careful, US, Canada, and Australia are similar to the zionist colony, but there is still many differences. The European colonizer scum colonized US, Australia and the like much much much before the zionist colonizations. In other words, no one know who owned or lived where anymore. of course, that doesn&#39;t mean the native lost their right; it just make the issue much much more complicated than that of Palestine. Another difference is that when the european scum colonizid Austraila etc. there was no such thing as Geneva conventions and International law. When the zinonists established their colony, there was Geneva conventinons and International law that recognized the rights of the Palestinains. That&#39;s why, as the statistcs I provided proved, the Palestinain right to the land was officaly recognized by International law and offical statistis, unlike US, Canada and others.

"I do see what you are saying. It is a valid point, but you must remember that the name isnt the biggest issue here"

actually, thats why I&#39;m involved in this long argument. it is a tricky issue. It might at first seem totaly irrelivant what you want to call the state, that it even doesn&#39;t currently exist&#33; But the name might actually be deciding wehter the conflict will end or not. As I said, colonialism should be COMPLETLEY destroyed.

I thought I would leave you with this. A document submitted by Arafat’s Fatah organization to the Second World Congress on Palestine in September 1970 spells out the profile of a democratic and secular Palestine even more clearly. The 1970 Fatah document states:


Pre-1948 Palestine - as defined during the British mandate - is the territory to be liberated ... It should be quite obvious at this stage that the new Palestine discussed here is not the occupied West Bank or the Gaza Strip or both. These are areas occupied by the Israelis since June 1967. The homeland of the Palestinians usurped and colonized in 1948 is no less dear or important than the part occupied in 1967.

Besides, the very existence of the racist oppressor state of Israel, based on the expulsion and forced exile of part of its citizens, even from one tiny village, is unacceptable to the revolution. Any arrangement accommodating the aggressor settler state is unacceptable and temporary ...

All the Jews, Moslems, and Christians living in Palestine or forcibly exiled from it will have the right to Palestinian citizenship ... This means that all Jewish Palestinians - at the present Israelis - have the same rights provided, of course, that they reject Zionist racist chauvinism and fully agree to live as Palestinians in the new Palestine ... It is the belief of the revolution that the majority of the present Israeli Jews will change their attitudes and will subscribe to the new Palestine, especially after the oligarchic state machinery, economy, and military establishment are destroyed.

[Phalanx]

Aside from the petty debate over semantics, I think you&#39;re both right. Israel is a state based on racist principles and must be dismantled. My and many others&#39; arguments for the status quo are ridiculous and unfounded, I&#39;ll admit I&#39;m wrong.

[Question everything]

Originally posted by pusher robot+April 27, 2007 02:57 am--> (pusher robot @ April 27, 2007 02:57 am)
Originally posted by Question [email protected] 27, 2007 12:47 am

Originally posted by pusher [email protected] 25, 2007 05:14 pm

[email protected] 25, 2007 05:08 pm

I know a family of Cuban refugees. Half the family have been killed, and all their lands have been confiscated by the communist state.

What say you?

HURRAY&#33;
You are a beacon of compassion.
There are personal storys everywhere I try to listen to them, but if you want to pull that "have some compassion" shit on me you should at least look at what Bastilica did.
Finally, somebody got my original point.

Reasoning by anecdote is silly. [/b]
Still, Israel is doing it systematically. I agree that We cannot reason everything by a sad story, but still Israel is a Cruel, Racist, Imperialist country.

[Phalanx]

Still, Israel is doing it systematically. I agree that We cannot reason everything by a sad story, but still Israel is a Cruel, Racist, Imperialist country.

True. But, like the other imperialist countries, the tide is changing. Israel simply cannot remain under its current form due to it&#39;s "crisis" in demographics. Israeli Arabs and Palestinians will soon outnumber Jews in the area, which will force Israel into one of two things- the current Apartheid state, or a binational state.

Keep in mind the power of demographics- the situation in Northern Ireland, Lebanon (specificially the decline of the Christian minority) and the fall of the USSR (the fragmentation, in part, was due to the increase of non-Russian people, making Moscows&#39; control over areas like Central Asia increasingly difficult). Although race, ethnicity, or religion (or lackthereof) play no part in a workers&#39; alliance, states that are formed out of any of those three depend on what they represent to stay afloat. So if that means Israel no longer is a Jewish-majority state, Israel has lost it&#39;s last remaining vestige as the state it was supposed to be.

[Question everything]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 12:25 am

Still, Israel is doing it systematically. I agree that We cannot reason everything by a sad story, but still Israel is a Cruel, Racist, Imperialist country.

True. But, like the other imperialist countries, the tide is changing. Israel simply cannot remain under its current form due to it&#39;s "crisis" in demographics. Israeli Arabs and Palestinians will soon outnumber Jews in the area, which will force Israel into one of two things- the current Apartheid state, or a binational state.

Keep in mind the power of demographics- the situation in Northern Ireland, Lebanon (specificially the decline of the Christian minority) and the fall of the USSR (the fragmentation, in part, was due to the increase of non-Russian people, making Moscows&#39; control over areas like Central Asia increasingly difficult). Although race, ethnicity, or religion (or lackthereof) play no part in a workers&#39; alliance, states that are formed out of any of those three depend on what they represent to stay afloat. So if that means Israel no longer is a Jewish-majority state, Israel has lost it&#39;s last remaining vestige as the state it was supposed to be.
I&#39;d imagine they would react by starting a war, that&#39;s how they ussually deal with it...

[Phalanx]

I&#39;d imagine they would react by starting a war, that&#39;s how they ussually deal with it...

Yes, because Israel, like many other European colonies, relies on the instability of its neighbors to exist in its current form. South Africa stirred up trouble as much as it could in Angola and Mozambique, supporting the pro-imperialist RENAMO against the Marxist FRELIMO. Eventually change didn&#39;t come from exterior powers, but from within, the pressure from the black community eventually became too much for the white overlords to deal with. The same situation will probably play out in the Mideast.

[Okocim]

I gots you guys another present:

http://vwt.d2g.com:8081/jewish_blood.jpg

lovely, huh? :blink:

I sure am glad that they don&#39;t hate Jews and wish to wipe Jews of the face of the earth. No course not....they just want "their" (even that&#39;s arguable) land back peacefully&#33;


:lol:

[Revolution Until Victory]

"I sure am glad that they don&#39;t hate Jews and wish to wipe Jews of the face of the earth. No course not....they just want "their" (even that&#39;s arguable) land back peacefully&#33;"

first of all, the zionists have proven their hatred and racism towards arabs well enough.

now what did you say zionist slut?? "even that&#39;s arguable"??? really??


- The CCP Refugee Office (a UN offical commitee) estimated that although only a little more than a quarter was considered cultivable, more than 80 percent of Israel&#39;s total area of 20,850 km.sq. represented land abandoned by the Arab refugees. Three-quarters of the former Arab land was sub-marginal land or semi-desert in the Negeb.
(The Establishment of the State of Israel as a Jewish State from Chapter I in: Israel –An Apartheid State, by Uri Davis, Zed Books, London and New Jersey, 1987)

- According to the Survey of Palestine prepared by the UN prior to the 1947 partition, P.566, over 94% of Palestine&#39;s total area belonged to Palestinians, and the zionists own 5.8%

- Subcommittee 2 of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestine Question stated in its report to the United Nations General Assembly the following:
Closely connected with the distribution of population is the factor of land ownership in the proposed Jewish State. The bulk of the land in the Arab State, as well as in the proposed Jewish State, is owned and possessed by Arabs. This is clear from the following statistics furnished to the Sub-Committee by the United Kingdom representative, showing the respective percentages of Arab and Jewish ownership of land in the various sub-districts of Palestine.
(Official Records of the Second Session of the General Assembly Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestine Question, Summary Records of Meetings, 25 September-25 November, 1947, pp. 292-293.)

- Ben-Gurion himself, (arguable eh??? :rolleyes:) admitted Palestine belongs to the Palestinian people (although the zionists did own 5.8%). In a UNCCP document dated July 4, 1947, oral evidence were presented at a public meeting were Ben-Gurion was present. Ben-Gurion was discussing the “disparities between Jews and Arabs” in Palestine. He stated:
“I shall mention only a few [referring to the disparities between Arabs and Jews]. There is the disparity in numbers. There are some 600,000 Jews in Palestine and some 1,100,000 Arabs. There are no reliable figures in this respect. There is an even greater disparity than that. The Arabs own 94% of the land, the Jews only 6%. The Arabs have seven States, the Jews none..."

here is the document found on line:
http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7735b7...71?OpenDocument

[Question everything]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 06:15 pm

I&#39;d imagine they would react by starting a war, that&#39;s how they ussually deal with it...

Yes, because Israel, like many other European colonies, relies on the instability of its neighbors to exist in its current form. South Africa stirred up trouble as much as it could in Angola and Mozambique, supporting the pro-imperialist RENAMO against the Marxist FRELIMO. Eventually change didn&#39;t come from exterior powers, but from within, the pressure from the black community eventually became too much for the white overlords to deal with. The same situation will probably play out in the Mideast.
Also a war in Israel has been used a an excuse to send Palestinians to Refugee camps.

[Phalanx]

Also a war in Israel has been used a an excuse to send Palestinians to Refugee camps.

Israel isn&#39;t alone in that case. Jordan has used Black September as an excuse to drive Palestinians from Jordan, and Egypt and Lebanon didn&#39;t do a thing to try an help the plight of the refugees when they were under the supervision of each country.

[Question everything]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 02:46 pm

Also a war in Israel has been used a an excuse to send Palestinians to Refugee camps.

Israel isn&#39;t alone in that case. Jordan has used Black September as an excuse to drive Palestinians from Jordan, and Egypt and Lebanon didn&#39;t do a thing to try an help the plight of the refugees when they were under the supervision of each country.
Why exactly are you restricted? No offence but when I see restricted member I ussually expect a cappie troll)

[Phalanx]

Long story.

I was desperate for college money, so I was about to join the Marines, and I figured I couldn&#39;t be left-leaning in that situation, so I tried to change. But I couldn&#39;t, and decided to tell the Marines to fuck off and try to pay for college some other way.

But I&#39;m back to being un izquierdista para vida&#33; :redstar:

Anyway, Israel should be dismantled and the right of return implemented immediately.

[Question everything]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 12:31 am
Long story.

I was desperate for college money, so I was about to join the Marines, and I figured I couldn&#39;t be left-leaning in that situation, so I tried to change. But I couldn&#39;t, and decided to tell the Marines to fuck off and try to pay for college some other way.

But I&#39;m back to being un izquierdista para vida&#33; :redstar:

Anyway, Israel should be dismantled and the right of return implemented immediately.
:D Hope you get unrestricted soon&#33;&#33;&#33;

[Phalanx]

Originally posted by Question everything+May 02, 2007 12:48 am--> (Question everything @ May 02, 2007 12:48 am)
[email protected] 02, 2007 12:31 am
Long story.

I was desperate for college money, so I was about to join the Marines, and I figured I couldn&#39;t be left-leaning in that situation, so I tried to change. But I couldn&#39;t, and decided to tell the Marines to fuck off and try to pay for college some other way.

But I&#39;m back to being un izquierdista para vida&#33; :redstar:

Anyway, Israel should be dismantled and the right of return implemented immediately.
:D Hope you get unrestricted soon&#33;&#33;&#33; [/b]
Yeah I do too :P.

[Okocim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 01:31 am
Anyway, Israel should be dismantled and the right of return implemented immediately.
no it shouldn&#39;t.

[Raj Radical]

Israel has a right to exist as the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people

Period. End of discussion. It isen&#39;t going anywhere.

If you are discussing it&#39;s treatment of Palestinians or it&#39;s influence of US foreign policy (a favorite among the Stormfront crew) then that is a completely different discussion.

[cormacobear]

Negotiation beats conflict measured in life not dollars. Isreals strength carries negotiating priveledges. Isreals return to the 67 borders would settle this. They now cower behind the fear of justified occupational offences retribution.

Both peoples were mistreated by their Turko-Ottoman rulers anti-semetism was adopted by the last days of the empire for the same reason Hitler did, a focused enemy will unite all those not in said group. Such ideals spread most quickly among non included arab speakers.

The anti semitism among palestinians today is entirely the creation of Isreals zionist policies.

Ignorance- populations explode among uneducated refugees, lack of education persists as policy.

Force people off land held by generations ancient; will enevitably focus an entire population to focus aggressive energies. Employment of oppressive state control the Romans never considered and cruelty not seen since the huns, combined with poverty level education Isreal deserves more than it&#39;s got.

The Irish sympathize with those occupied. To discuss the historical control of the land from the dawn of civilization to the present The Byzantines have the best claims but letting Turkey decide would give them nukes....we&#39;re just never happy.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by Raj [email protected] 02, 2007 07:37 am
Israel has a right to exist as the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people

Period. End of discussion. It isen&#39;t going anywhere.

If you are discussing it&#39;s treatment of Palestinians or it&#39;s influence of US foreign policy (a favorite among the Stormfront crew) then that is a completely different discussion.
Really??? so your basing your claim on ancient myths and rituals?
"it&#39;s my land coz my father was here 2000 yrs ago"

so Mr. Raj is saying the zionists got the right to take this land, which according to international law and offical documents, NOT ancient myths and riutals, belongs to Palestinains, after they have expelled the Natives, and just like Aprtheid South Africa, they have a right to steal the natives land and confine the true owners to Bantustans that are less than 20% of their original homeland, just coz their father was there once over 2000 yrs ago...

this is what Malcolm X said about the issue:

"Did the Zionists have the legal or moral right to invade Arab Palestine, uproot its Arab citizens from their homes and seize all Arab property for themselves just based on the "religious" claim that their forefathers lived there thousands of years ago? Only a thousand years ago the Moors lived in Spain. Would this give the Moors of today the legal and moral right to invade the Iberian Peninsula, drive out its Spanish citizens, and then set up a new Moroccan nation ... where Spain used to be, as the European zionists have done to our Arab brothers and sisters in Palestine?..."

"its not going anywhere"

lol. if you know your history, you would realize what kind of stupid statment is this.
Aprtheid South Africa, a settler-colony built on stolen lands was dismantled.
In Algeria, during French colonization, the French kept saying "France in Algeria is not going anywhere; it&#39;s a fact of life"
and next thing, after 132, colonization ended.

Palestnians base their claim on not that "my father was here 2000 yrs ago" but on legal and officaly recognized documents which I have provided many times in this very thread. A settler-colony built on stolen land, on someone else blood, ruins, and expense should be immediatly dismantled, just like South Africa, to ensure minimum justice. (and of course, we are not even talking about treatemnt of Palestinains, imperialist support, and Apthreid)

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 08:20 am
Negotiation beats conflict measured in life not dollars. Isreals strength carries negotiating priveledges. Isreals return to the 67 borders would settle this. They now cower behind the fear of justified occupational offences retribution.


"Israel return to the 67 border"

you don&#39;t seem to realize what this means.
the settler-colony returning to the 67 borders means the Palestinains will have to accept a mini-state; in other words, that of which was demanded by the European colonizers of the South Africans, mini-homelands of less than 20% of their original land; bantustans.
Your saying that the Bantustans, with 20% of the Palestinains original homeland, will in some way, solve the conflict.
that is bullshit.
the Bantustans didn&#39;t solve the conflict in South Africa. The South African people REJECTED the Bantustans. They fought a popular guerilla warfare and got their freedom, rights, and independece. The Palestinains say NO to the Bantustans.
They will fight, like in South Africa, for the liberation of man and land; for the establishment of secular democratic Palestine in which all its inhabitants got equal rights.

[Phalanx]

Originally posted by Okocim+May 02, 2007 07:32 am--> (Okocim @ May 02, 2007 07:32 am)
[email protected] 02, 2007 01:31 am
Anyway, Israel should be dismantled and the right of return implemented immediately.
no it shouldn&#39;t. [/b]
An ethnically-based state has no place in a world after revolution, hell, even under this system. People should be able to live wherever they want, but not at the expense of others, especially when that means shoving those native to the land and creating an entirely new state.

[Okocim]

Originally posted by Phalanx+May 02, 2007 04:15 pm--> (Phalanx @ May 02, 2007 04:15 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 07:32 am

[email protected] 02, 2007 01:31 am
Anyway, Israel should be dismantled and the right of return implemented immediately.
no it shouldn&#39;t.
An ethnically-based state has no place in a world after revolution, hell, even under this system. People should be able to live wherever they want, but not at the expense of others, especially when that means shoving those native to the land and creating an entirely new state. [/b]
We don&#39;t live after the revolution: if we did then no state would have any basis for existence.

Try harder. :rolleyes:

[Revolution Until Victory]

Originally posted by Okocim+May 02, 2007 05:08 pm--> (Okocim &#064; May 02, 2007 05:08 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 04:15 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 07:32 am

[email protected] 02, 2007 01:31 am
Anyway, Israel should be dismantled and the right of return implemented immediately.
no it shouldn&#39;t.
An ethnically-based state has no place in a world after revolution, hell, even under this system. People should be able to live wherever they want, but not at the expense of others, especially when that means shoving those native to the land and creating an entirely new state.
We don&#39;t live after the revolution: if we did then no state would have any basis for existence.

Try harder. :rolleyes:[/b]
Okicim , you prick, we have already given you all the evidence and reason why this settler-colony should be dismantled like any other colony, but you just ignored them and didn&#39;t answer them. What Phalanx gave is obvioulsy not the reason.

Try harder little boy. :rolleyes:

[ichneumon]

Israel has a right to exist as the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people

so mexico belongs to the nahautl? georgia should be given to the creeks and cherokees? what?

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Okocim+May 02, 2007 05:08 pm--> (Okocim &#064; May 02, 2007 05:08 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 04:15 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 07:32 am

[email protected] 02, 2007 01:31 am
Anyway, Israel should be dismantled and the right of return implemented immediately.
no it shouldn&#39;t.
An ethnically-based state has no place in a world after revolution, hell, even under this system. People should be able to live wherever they want, but not at the expense of others, especially when that means shoving those native to the land and creating an entirely new state.
We don&#39;t live after the revolution: if we did then no state would have any basis for existence.

Try harder. :rolleyes: [/b]
So essentially what you are saying is "I support the revolution, but thats not here yet, so in the meanwhile, I think I&#39;m going to pass my time by supporting all the things the revolution I also support will eventually overthrow."

I think you may have to choose between zionism and leftism, because you simply cant balance both on a pole like youve been trying.

Your an Oxymoron, the colonialist anti-imperialist. Doesnt make any sense.

[50cal_words]

Most countrys founded by religion become corrupt. Given the circumstance, i would like to say they were justified, but i has and will go so wrong, i wont

[Okocim]

Originally posted by EwokUtopia+May 02, 2007 07:26 pm--> (EwokUtopia &#064; May 02, 2007 07:26 pm)So essentially what you are saying is "I support the revolution, but thats not here yet, so in the meanwhile, I think I&#39;m going to pass my time by supporting all the things the revolution I also support will eventually overthrow."

I think you may have to choose between zionism and leftism, because you simply cant balance both on a pole like youve been trying.

Your an Oxymoron, the colonialist anti-imperialist. Doesnt make any sense.[/b]
Ok, so let&#39;s say that&#39;s the case (it&#39;s not btw), then why are you supporting a "Palestinian state"? i mean, if you&#39;re gonna overthrow it anyway, what&#39;s the point? why not whinge a bit about Dafur or Chechnya? or is it because they don&#39;t they allow you to opportunistically "ally" yourselves with one of the most reactionary elements in society and express your hatred for Jews?

kautskyites.




Revolution Until [email protected] 02, 2007 06:37 pm
Okicim , you prick, we have already given you all the evidence and reason why this settler-colony should be dismantled like any other colony, but you just ignored them and didn&#39;t answer them. What Phalanx gave is obvioulsy not the reason.

Try harder little boy. :rolleyes:
you want me to quote from some thread i&#39;m locked out of? :blink:

"little boy"...what? are you like 80?

[Revolution Until Victory]

"you want me to quote from some thread i&#39;m locked out of?"

who ever said you have to quote form the thread your restricted from???
you don&#39;t have to quote to reply. You can simply copy & paste, or simply read them and reply to them with out quoting. Also, I wasn&#39;t talking about after you have been restricted. I meant BEFORE, when you were constantly ignoring and refusing to answer mine, and many other members&#39; posts.

[Okocim]

No I wasn&#39;t, I answered many of your posts when I had time to do so and then I got restricted.

[Phalanx]

Ok, so let&#39;s say that&#39;s the case (it&#39;s not btw), then why are you supporting a "Palestinian state"? i mean, if you&#39;re gonna overthrow it anyway, what&#39;s the point? why not whinge a bit about Dafur or Chechnya? or is it because they don&#39;t they allow you to opportunistically "ally" yourselves with one of the most reactionary elements in society and express your hatred for Jews?

Obviously the best outcome would be a worker state with a united Jewish and Arab proletariat. But given the current political climate, it&#39;s unrealistic that that would happen, so giving the land back to the origional inhabitants would be the next best thing.

Not to mention a Palestinian state wouldn&#39;t be ethnically based. It would just have equal rights for Arabs and Jews, and a right of return implemented.

The situation in Darfur is atrocious, and it&#39;s appalling that the media doesn&#39;t give it much attention. The sad fact is though, information on Darfur and Chechnya isn&#39;t as readily avaliable to most people here, given that the vast majority of users are from western nations.

And btw, I&#39;m a (non-practising) Jew that thinks Israel should be dismantled.

[Raj Radical]

Originally posted by Revolution Until Victory+May 02, 2007 12:42 pm--> (Revolution Until Victory @ May 02, 2007 12:42 pm)
Raj [email protected] 02, 2007 07:37 am
Israel has a right to exist as the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people

Period. End of discussion. It isen&#39;t going anywhere.

If you are discussing it&#39;s treatment of Palestinians or it&#39;s influence of US foreign policy (a favorite among the Stormfront crew) then that is a completely different discussion.
Really??? so your basing your claim on ancient myths and rituals?
"it&#39;s my land coz my father was here 2000 yrs ago"

so Mr. Raj is saying the zionists got the right to take this land, which according to international law and offical documents, NOT ancient myths and riutals, belongs to Palestinains, after they have expelled the Natives, and just like Aprtheid South Africa, they have a right to steal the natives land and confine the true owners to Bantustans that are less than 20% of their original homeland, just coz their father was there once over 2000 yrs ago...

this is what Malcolm X said about the issue:

"Did the Zionists have the legal or moral right to invade Arab Palestine, uproot its Arab citizens from their homes and seize all Arab property for themselves just based on the "religious" claim that their forefathers lived there thousands of years ago? Only a thousand years ago the Moors lived in Spain. Would this give the Moors of today the legal and moral right to invade the Iberian Peninsula, drive out its Spanish citizens, and then set up a new Moroccan nation ... where Spain used to be, as the European zionists have done to our Arab brothers and sisters in Palestine?..."

"its not going anywhere"

lol. if you know your history, you would realize what kind of stupid statment is this.
Aprtheid South Africa, a settler-colony built on stolen lands was dismantled.
In Algeria, during French colonization, the French kept saying "France in Algeria is not going anywhere; it&#39;s a fact of life"
and next thing, after 132, colonization ended.

Palestnians base their claim on not that "my father was here 2000 yrs ago" but on legal and officaly recognized documents which I have provided many times in this very thread. A settler-colony built on stolen land, on someone else blood, ruins, and expense should be immediatly dismantled, just like South Africa, to ensure minimum justice. (and of course, we are not even talking about treatemnt of Palestinains, imperialist support, and Apthreid) [/b]
Malcolm X was blinded by religious zealotry and an outspoken bigot.

Read my response in the History forum, RUV.

Jews have held continuous settlements in Canaan for four thousand years. Arab presence has existed as long as the theocratic Muslim caliphate and subsequent Imperialism and Ottoman Empire. To say that Jews have no right to Israel and should leave is just as absurd as saying the Palestinians don&#39;t and should leave.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Okocim+May 02, 2007 10:23 pm--> (Okocim @ May 02, 2007 10:23 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2007 07:26 pm
So essentially what you are saying is "I support the revolution, but thats not here yet, so in the meanwhile, I think I&#39;m going to pass my time by supporting all the things the revolution I also support will eventually overthrow."

I think you may have to choose between zionism and leftism, because you simply cant balance both on a pole like youve been trying.

Your an Oxymoron, the colonialist anti-imperialist. Doesnt make any sense.
Ok, so let&#39;s say that&#39;s the case (it&#39;s not btw), then why are you supporting a "Palestinian state"? i mean, if you&#39;re gonna overthrow it anyway, what&#39;s the point? why not whinge a bit about Dafur or Chechnya? or is it because they don&#39;t they allow you to opportunistically "ally" yourselves with one of the most reactionary elements in society and express your hatred for Jews?

kautskyites. [/b]
You assume too much.

I fully support both the people of darfur against the racist jangaweed&#39;s and the people of Chechnya against the Russian imperialist bastards every bit as much as I support the poeple of Palestine. Chechnya and Darfur are unfortunately not as prevailant in the western media as Palestine, so my voice for them will be weaker as it struggles against a weaker current of mass racism.

But I totally support Chechnya and Darfur, Ive even brought the Chechen issue up in Candian anti-imperialist groups, which says alot being as there isnt much a Canadian can do about the oppression of the people of Chechnya and Dagestan.

[KC]

Malcolm X was blinded by religious zealotry and an outspoken bigot.

Yeah, completely ignore the quote and go off on a completely irrelevant tangent. You sure convinced me&#33;


To say that Jews have no right to Israel

No race should have a "right" to a state. And by the way, palestinian isn&#39;t a race, so comparing the two is a fallacious comparison.

[Revolution Until Victory]

"Jews have held continuous settlements in Canaan for four thousand years."

that&#39;s another stupid lie. the word "continuous" might imply very different and untrue meanings. Lets see, just before zionism or actually, at the very begning, the jewish people were less than 5% of the population. Notice here, I&#39;m even counting those who were recent immigrants escaping Russian pogroms.
so less, probably much less, than 5% of population is for you, "continual" presence.
so? the muslims after leaving Spain have a continual precence&#33; in fact, I believe right now they are around 5% of the population. Can I claim that the arabs have a historical right to Spain, since they have a continual presence??
the issue is already clear. I have provided my clear offiacl statistc and evidence, and you have done was basiclly...shit.
"they have a historical right" what kind of bullshit is this.

"To say that Jews have no right to Israel and should leave is just as absurd as saying the Palestinians don&#39;t and should leave."

don&#39;t put words in my mouth. According to offial statistics and International law and regocgnized documents, and NOT according to historical lunacy and myths, Palestine belongs to the Palestinian people. However, that doesn&#39;t mean the jewish people have to leave. I never suggested this. In fact, here is the offical and popular posistion of the Palestinian people. A document submitted by Arafat’s Fatah organization to the Second World Congress on Palestine in September 1970 spells out the profile of a democratic and secular Palestine. The 1970 Fatah document states:

Pre-1948 Palestine - as defined during the British mandate - is the territory to be liberated ... It should be quite obvious at this stage that the new Palestine discussed here is not the occupied West Bank or the Gaza Strip or both. These are areas occupied by the Israelis since June 1967. The homeland of the Palestinians usurped and colonized in 1948 is no less dear or important than the part occupied in 1967.

Besides, the very existence of the racist oppressor state of Israel, based on the expulsion and forced exile of part of its citizens, even from one tiny village, is unacceptable to the revolution. Any arrangement accommodating the aggressor settler state is unacceptable and temporary ...

All the Jews, Moslems, and Christians living in Palestine or forcibly exiled from it will have the right to Palestinian citizenship ... This means that all Jewish Palestinians - at the present Israelis - have the same rights provided, of course, that they reject Zionist racist chauvinism and fully agree to live as Palestinians in the new Palestine ... It is the belief of the revolution that the majority of the present Israeli Jews will change their attitudes and will subscribe to the new Palestine, especially after the oligarchic state machinery, economy, and military establishment are destroyed.

[Raj Radical]

Originally posted by Zampanò@May 03, 2007 05:14 am

Malcolm X was blinded by religious zealotry and an outspoken bigot.

Yeah, completely ignore the quote and go off on a completely irrelevant tangent. You sure convinced me&#33;


To say that Jews have no right to Israel

No race should have a "right" to a state. And by the way, palestinian isn&#39;t a race, so comparing the two is a fallacious comparison.
"Jew" is not a race.

RUV, read my response in the history forum.

[EwokUtopia]

You simply cant base a nation on the notion that since some indirect ancestors of yours owned it 2000 years ago, it therefore belongs to you. I suppose that the Germanic-speaking English people should get out because that was Celtic land, or the Turkish people should give back half their country to Greece.

And that doesnt even bring in the God factor. The fact that there is a nation based on some non-existant promise made between the sky-fairy and the only ethnicity he seemed to like over 3000 years ago is absolutely absurd&#33;

And you all of course know that Christian fundies (http://www.theocracywatch.org/christian_zionism.htm) are using the zionists to get Jesus to come back, hense the major and radical pro-Israel stance of the United States of Jesusland.

[Revolution Until Victory]

"RUV, read my response in the history forum."

what the hell are you talking about?? in the history thread, you only gave one stupid stupid argument about the 67 aggresion which I more than easly thrashed; but you didn&#39;t mention, neither here or in History, ANY of the points made on this thread.

[KC]

"Jew" is not a race.

Uh, yes, jewish people are a race.

[Raj Radical]

Originally posted by Zampanò@May 04, 2007 01:44 am

"Jew" is not a race.

Uh, yes, jewish people are a race.
Jews are a "people".

An ethnicity of descendants from the ancient Israelites and the converts who have joined over the years.

If you converted to Judaism, you would be just as Jewish as me.

[Alenichev]

Originally posted by Zampanò@May 04, 2007 01:44 am

"Jew" is not a race.

Uh, yes, jewish people are a race.
Does every jew have the same genetic characteristics?

[Okocim]

Originally posted by EwokUtopia+May 04, 2007 12:30 am--> (EwokUtopia &#064; May 04, 2007 12:30 am)You simply cant base a nation on the notion that since some indirect ancestors of yours owned it 2000 years ago, it therefore belongs to you. I suppose that the Germanic-speaking English people should get out because that was Celtic land, or the Turkish people should give back half their country to Greece.

And that doesnt even bring in the God factor. The fact that there is a nation based on some non-existant promise made between the sky-fairy and the only ethnicity he seemed to like over 3000 years ago is absolutely absurd&#33; [/b]
so why does it belong to the "palestinians" then? :rolleyes:

It was given to Jews by Britain, Arabs got given far far more land but that wasn&#39;t good enough they wanted Israel too, so created a "national identity" for a small group of themselves in order to whinge about self-determination to a bunch of morons.


I can&#39;t think of many Zionists who base Israel&#39;s legitimacy solely on the G-d factor, that&#39;s usually just added impetus for religious Zionists, many are in fact atheists.



Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 12:11 pm
Does every jew have the same genetic characteristics?
There are multiple studies showing that Jews share many genetic characteristics, there&#39;s also the fact that some genetic disease affect almost solely Jews (http://www.mazornet.com/genetics/index.asp).

Sure, for converts this doesn&#39;t count, but converts only make up a tiny minority of Jews.


[email protected] 03, 2007 03:32 am
Not to mention a Palestinian state wouldn&#39;t be ethnically based. It would just have equal rights for Arabs and Jews, and a right of return implemented.

Israel gives equal rights to its Jewish and non-Jewish citizens.

A "palestinian state" would mean the end of the road for Jews in the area, we&#39;ve seen the treatment of Jews in Saudi-Arabia, Iran, Jordan etc and it would be repeated in this new state you want. In addition, it&#39;s highly likely the state would be an undemocratic, homophobic, misogynistic theocracy and tbh, we&#39;ve got quite enough of them in the world so really don&#39;t need any more.

[Revolution Until Victory]

"so why does it belong to the "palestinians" then?"

I have posted the evidence, offical statistcs and recognized documents by the UN, over 20 times; and you&#39;ve seen them. Palestinains do not make their claim based on "my ancestors were once there 2000 yrs ago"
stop your bullshit, Okocim kid.


"It was given to Jews by Britain, Arabs got given far far more land but that wasn&#39;t good enough they wanted Israel too, so created a "national identity" for a small group of themselves in order to whinge about self-determination to a bunch of morons."

it was given to the jews??? and whom are those to give the land to the jews???
colonial racist scum who DO NOT OWN THE LAND giving it to another colonizers WHO ALSO DO NOT OWN THE LAND on the expense of the true owners of the land.

"so created a "national identity" for a small group of themselves in order to whinge about self-determination to a bunch of morons. "

this national ID goes as far back as the Ottman colonization. but that is still irrelivant. the Palestinian ID developed as a response to the threats from European and Zionist colonialism. Same was as Neigerian, Mexican, Kenyan etc. nationalist developed as a response to threats from European colonization. so What? you wanna call the Neigerians "a bunch of morons" too??
that&#39;s very natural. Most of people today developed their ID relativly recently in response to colonial threat. If there was no threat from zionism and colonialism, Palestinain nationality wouldn&#39;t have probably developed to what it is now.

"I can&#39;t think of many Zionists who base Israel&#39;s legitimacy solely on the G-d factor"

now that&#39;s just plain bullshit.

"Israel gives equal rights to its Jewish and non-Jewish citizens."

another peice of trademark utter and plain bullshit.
the settler-colony doens&#39;t give equal rights to its citezens through over 20 racist laws, of which I have provided over 9 or 8 only. of course, we are only speaking of INSIDE the colony, and ON PAPER. in practice, not in law, the settler-colony is among the most racist palces on earth. And outside of the colony, in the Occupied terretores, the situation have been described by South Afrians, incuding Tutu and Mandela as 10 times worse than Aprhteid South Africa.


"A "palestinian state" would mean the end of the road for Jews in the area, we&#39;ve seen the treatment of Jews in Saudi-Arabia, Iran, Jordan etc and it would be repeated in this new state you want. In addition, it&#39;s highly likely the state would be an undemocratic, homophobic, misogynistic theocracy and tbh, we&#39;ve got quite enough of them in the world so really don&#39;t need any more. "

what kind of crap is this??? Palestine belong to the palestinain people, they have the RIGHT of freedom and independence on ALL of their land. the traditionaly colonial 19th century idea of exploiting and opressing "lesser" people is NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE. Before zionism, the jews were living the best life they can get almost any where in the world. This should be you comparison.

[Phalanx]

Before zionism, the jews were living the best life they can get almost any where in the world. This should be you comparison.

That&#39;s not true. Unless you consider the Holocaust a high point in Jewish culture.

[Revolution Until Victory]

Phalanx, you are hiarious my friend&#33;&#33;&#33; :lol: :lol:

did you really think I was talking about the Jewish people living in relative harmony in ALL AROUND THE WORLD??? are you serious??
sorry if you misunderstood me, but I meant the Jewish people were living in realtive harmony and had their Golden Age IN THE ARAB WORLD, before zionism, not all around the world. :)

[Raj Radical]

The logic of Revolution Until Victory:

- Jews had no right to establish a Jewish state next to a Palestinian state in 1947. They only comprised a minority of the population.

-Their claim of sovereignty via ancestry is absurd



- Despite the fact that Arab Palestinians only comprise a minority of the population, the land of Canaan/Israel/Palestine/Judah should be ruled by a single Palestinian authority.

- Our right of sovereignty stems from the fact that our ancestors are/were the original majority population.

[Okocim]

Originally posted by Revolution Until Victory+May 04, 2007 03:43 pm--> (Revolution Until Victory &#064; May 04, 2007 03:43 pm)Okicim the zinist slut is back&#33;&#33;&#33; :lol: [/b]

do you realise the misogynistic connotations of the word slut? And yet still you throw it around (this isn&#39;t the first time).



Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 04, 2007 03:43 pm
I have posted the evidence, offical statistcs and recognized documents by the UN, over 20 times; and you&#39;ve seen them. Palestinains do not make their claim based on "my ancestors were once there 2000 yrs ago"
stop your bullshit, Okocim kid.

Yes they do, that&#39;s what your argument boiled down to.


Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 04, 2007 03:43 pm
it was given to the jews??? and whom are those to give the land to the jews???
colonial racist scum who DO NOT OWN THE LAND giving it to another colonizers WHO ALSO DO NOT OWN THE LAND on the expense of the true owners of the land.

this national ID goes as far back as the Ottman colonization. but that is still irrelivant. the Palestinian ID developed as a response to the threats from European and Zionist colonialism. Same was as Neigerian, Mexican, Kenyan etc. nationalist developed as a response to threats from European colonization. so What? you wanna call the Neigerians "a bunch of morons" too??
that&#39;s very natural. Most of people today developed their ID relativly recently in response to colonial threat. If there was no threat from zionism and colonialism, Palestinain nationality wouldn&#39;t have probably developed to what it is now.

the "morons" was a reference to people like you actually.

The land was under British mandate, they could do with it what they wanted, there were also many Jews already living there. In fact, the vast vast majority of the land, Transjordan, was given to arabs, with the British excluding Jews from settling there, when the remainder was divided the arabs complained about getting a minority, seemingly having forgotten about them getting a huge part before.

http://www.freeman.org/m_online/may99/shusteff3.htm
If the Balfour Declaration had included "the option of the Jewish state," and if Britain strove towards "early fulfillment of that right," and if "the target period" for establishing the state had been one year; and if Britain had declared that the sovereign Jewish state "would be the best guarantee of Arab security," then, today, there would have been peace between the Jews and the Arabs. There would have been only two states on the mandated territory of Palestine: Israel and Jordan, and no one would have spoken of the so-called "Palestinian people."

Instead of this, Britain did everything it could so as not to allow the Jewish state to happen. Avi Shlaim wrote in The Politics of Partition that in August 1926 Transjordan&#39;s King Abdullah "had made an impassioned plea for Jewish involvement in the development of Transjordan: Palestine is one unit. The division between Palestine and Transjordan is artificial and wasteful. ...Please come to Transjordan. I guarantee your safety. Together we will work for the benefit of the country."


Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 04, 2007 03:43 pm
now that&#39;s just plain bullshit.

no it&#39;s not, many Zionists are atheists. It&#39;s fact.


Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 04, 2007 03:43 pm
another peice of trademark utter and plain bullshit.
the settler-colony doens&#39;t give equal rights to its citezens through over 20 racist laws, of which I have provided over 9 or 8 only. of course, we are only speaking of INSIDE the colony, and ON PAPER. in practice, not in law, the settler-colony is among the most racist palces on earth. And outside of the colony, in the Occupied terretores, the situation have been described by South Afrians, incuding Tutu and Mandela as 10 times worse than Aprhteid South Africa.

You gave me a bunch of bullshit misinformed lies actually.

wait a minute...you think that the situation between "palestinians" and Jews is worse than apartheid South Africa? :lol: do you actually know anything about apartheid South Africa?


Revolution Until [email protected] 04, 2007 03:43 pm
what kind of crap is this??? Palestine belong to the palestinain people, they have the RIGHT of freedom and independence on ALL of their land. the traditionaly colonial 19th century idea of exploiting and opressing "lesser" people is NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE. Before zionism, the jews were living the best life they can get almost any where in the world. This should be you comparison.

It is not "crap". Would you like real (as opposed to your fake Jewish quotes) quotes of Arab attitudes towards Jews? Of what their children are taught in their schools? Of what their holy book calls us? Of what their leaders have said?

[Revolution Until Victory]

"Jews had no right to establish a Jewish state next to a Palestinian state in 1947. They only comprised a minority of the population."

lol
not jews, not Chinese, not French had a right to establish a settler-colony on stolen Palestinain land. end of story. Palestine belonged to the Palestinian arab people.
the reason the zionist, and anyone for that matter, can&#39;t establish a colony on Palestinan land is coz Palestine belongs to the Palestinain arab people not coz this particular group would be the minority. the zionists can&#39;t establish a settler colony on Palestinain soil for the same reason the European colonizers can&#39;t estabish a colony on African soil in South Africa, Rhodeisa, Algeria, Congo, Angola, Muzmbique and all other African formely-colonized nations.

"Their claim of sovereignty via ancestry is absurd"

Spot on. You can&#39;t cliam the land based on the fact that your ancestors once had a kngdom there over 2000 yrs ago. As EwokUtopia said "suppose that the Germanic-speaking English people should get out because that was Celtic land, or the Turkish people should give back half their country to Greece." so yes, hell yes, it is 100% absurd. If we will go by your "logic", the world would be a mad-house. we would be demanding a resettlment of the entire wrold.

"Despite the fact that Arab Palestinians only comprise a minority of the population, the land of Canaan/Israel/Palestine/Judah should be ruled by a single Palestinian authority."

what???? "Arabs Palestinains only compromise a MINORITY of the population" are you serious?
for the thousand times I say it, Palestine belongs to the Palestinian arab people (except for 5.8% legally puchased by the zionists), they have the right of feedom, independence and self-determination on all of their lands. Palestinian demand a secular democratic Palestine for all of its citezens were jew and arab got equal rights, exactly like South Africa.

"Our right of sovereignty stems from the fact that our ancestors are/were the original majority population."

never made such a claim.

[Revolution Until Victory]

"The land was under British mandate, they could do with it what they wanted"

little Okicim kid, The British were powerful enough to illegitimatily control the land. however, they didn&#39;t have a right to. so no, the British colonial scum had no right whatsoever to give away land which they didn&#39;t own, to a people that also do not own the land, on the expense of those who truely own it.

"Yes they do, that&#39;s what your argument boiled down to. "

no, Okicim, unlike you and your fellow colonial scum, I would never base my cliam on historical myths and lunacy. the offical statistics and recognized documents by the UN prove my point clearly.


"no it&#39;s not, many Zionists are atheists. It&#39;s fact."

I never denied that many zionists are atheists. But there is fact that so many zionists, including influental leaders and even prime-minsiters who base their claim to the land through God.

"wait a minute...you think that the situation between "palestinians" and Jews is worse than apartheid South Africa? do you actually know anything about apartheid South Africa?"

first of all, it&#39;s not ME who said the situation in the zionist settler-colony was 10 times wrose than that of Aprtheid South Africa. it was those who exprinced it. I never went to South Afric nor lived under its Aprtheid, but Nelson Mandela, Tutu, among many many other South Africans are the ones who said so. In fact, recently, the UN sent a comittee, led by a native South Africa, to Palestine to investigate the situation there, and it offficaly recognized that the situation in Palestine was worse than Aprtheid South Africa.
I gave you only 8 or 9 of the over 20 racist law, and like usualy, you didn&#39;t respond. or actually you gave me a very convencing response: "a bunch of bullshit misinformed lies"

"Of what their holy book calls us"

first of all, before you start on your bullshit, the holy Quran called a SEGMENT of the jewish people who did something wrong as "Apes and Pigs"; in other words, wether this group was Jewish or French, it would sitll be called "apes and pigs" and the reason was its ACTIONS not is relegious affliation or ethnicity.
in fact, the New testement as well as the old one call the Jews much worse things than the Quran. Please don&#39;t get me started and force me to show you how racist and anti-arab the zionist leaders are, or what is being taught in those zionist colonial schools.
btw, did you really read you statment: "Of what their holy book calls us"
see Okicim you&#39;ve admitted you are Jewish. Now the reason I care is that I know no person in the right mind, let alone a "marxist-leninist" would support the settler-colony unless he got some personal realtion with it. no other reason.
that&#39;s why Graffic was supporting it, same thing with Raj Radica (if I&#39;m not mistaken, he said he was jewish) and of course, you colonial scum. so many Jewish people got this extremely wrong beliefe that since they are Jewish, they got to support the "Jewish State"
Again, don&#39;t get me wrong. the only reason I care if you are Jewish or not is to prove that there is no reason whatsoever for anyone, let alone a leftists, to support the colony, unless for personal reasons.

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 09:31 pm

the zionist colony should be replaced by a secular democratic PALESTINE where jew and arab could live equally and peacfully with equal rights.
Yasir Arafat described this in a biography written by journalist Alan Hart:

personally, i favor the one-state solution with a hardline tito-esque dictator. it worked for yugoslavia...
I favor a one-state solution with a sort of Titoist flavor as well.
Anyone promoting ethnic hate or superiority of Jew or Arab or any other group just disappears, and that&#39;s that.

Edit: I&#39;m Jewish by the way. I think that "Israel" should have a right of return for Jews and people of Palestinian descent from 1948 or earlier.

[Okocim]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 04, 2007 07:58 pm
"The land was under British mandate, they could do with it what they wanted"

little Okicim kid, The British were powerful enough to illegitimatily control the land. however, they didn&#39;t have a right to. so no, the British colonial scum had no right whatsoever to give away land which they didn&#39;t own, to a people that also do not own the land, on the expense of those who truely own it.

"Yes they do, that&#39;s what your argument boiled down to. "

no, Okicim, unlike you and your fellow colonial scum, I would never base my cliam on historical myths and lunacy. the offical statistics and recognized documents by the UN prove my point clearly.


"no it&#39;s not, many Zionists are atheists. It&#39;s fact."

I never denied that many zionists are atheists. But there is fact that so many zionists, including influental leaders and even prime-minsiters who base their claim to the land through God.

"wait a minute...you think that the situation between "palestinians" and Jews is worse than apartheid South Africa? do you actually know anything about apartheid South Africa?"

first of all, it&#39;s not ME who said the situation in the zionist settler-colony was 10 times wrose than that of Aprtheid South Africa. it was those who exprinced it. I never went to South Afric nor lived under its Aprtheid, but Nelson Mandela, Tutu, among many many other South Africans are the ones who said so. In fact, recently, the UN sent a comittee, led by a native South Africa, to Palestine to investigate the situation there, and it offficaly recognized that the situation in Palestine was worse than Aprtheid South Africa.
I gave you only 8 or 9 of the over 20 racist law, and like usualy, you didn&#39;t respond. or actually you gave me a very convencing response: "a bunch of bullshit misinformed lies"

"Of what their holy book calls us"

first of all, before you start on your bullshit, the holy Quran called a SEGMENT of the jewish people who did something wrong as "Apes and Pigs"; in other words, wether this group was Jewish or French, it would sitll be called "apes and pigs" and the reason was its ACTIONS not is relegious affliation or ethnicity.
in fact, the New testement as well as the old one call the Jews much worse things than the Quran. Please don&#39;t get me started and force me to show you how racist and anti-arab the zionist leaders are, or what is being taught in those zionist colonial schools.
btw, did you really read you statment: "Of what their holy book calls us"
see Okicim you&#39;ve admitted you are Jewish. Now the reason I care is that I know no person in the right mind, let alone a "marxist-leninist" would support the settler-colony unless he got some personal realtion with it. no other reason.
that&#39;s why Graffic was supporting it, same thing with Raj Radica (if I&#39;m not mistaken, he said he was jewish) and of course, you colonial scum. so many Jewish people got this extremely wrong beliefe that since they are Jewish, they got to support the "Jewish State"
Again, don&#39;t get me wrong. the only reason I care if you are Jewish or not is to prove that there is no reason whatsoever for anyone, let alone a leftists, to support the colony, unless for personal reasons.
You have left out parts of my post, address them then I will answer.

Also, rather than referring to things you&#39;ve already posted actually fucking post them here if you want me to prove what bullshit lies they are.


Also, it&#39;d be a hell of a lot easier if you used the <quote></quote> tag replace < > with [ ])

[Revolution Until Victory]

first of all, please do not speak of ignoring points and arguments. It&#39;s you who is probably the person who missed the most arguments on this whole thread BEFORE being restriced from Both me and many other posters.

no what did I leave??
Even If I left out points, you should&#39;ve answered. Anyways,
what things are you talking about?
I keep referring to the racist laws which I have posted over 10 times and you ignored BEFORE being restricted.
I also refer to the evidence that Palestine belongs to the Palestinian people which I have posted over 20 times, and again, like all other zionists here, ignored them BEFORE beging restricted.

[Okocim]

Would you like real (as opposed to your fake Jewish quotes) quotes of Arab attitudes towards Jews? Of what their children are taught in their schools? Of what their leaders have said?


the holy Quran

You muslim? that explains it. :rolleyes:

[Revolution Until Victory]

"You muslim? that explains it."

lol.
way to ignore the argument and change the subject.
you are a bigot.
me being Muslim or not got nothing to do with it.
tell, what do you mean by "that expalins it"??

stick to the arguments.

[Okocim]

The same thing you meant when you assumed I hold my stance merely because I happen to be Jewish.

I didn&#39;t change the argument, I just copied exactly what you just did.

[Revolution Until Victory]

"The same thing you meant when you assumed I hold my stance merely because I happen to be Jewish."

so you mean you can&#39;t find any reason why one would support Palestine, unless he got a personal realtion to it??
that was similar to my argument. but the difference was, as this fourm have proven, in no way you have to be muslim to support Palestine, since the vast vast majority on this forum supports Palestine without being muslims.
but you have been proven wrong since most posters here are both non-muslim and anti-colonialism and zionism.

when I said stick to the argument, I meant all the other arguments, not the one of you being Jewish; the arguments which you didn&#39;t want to answer coz I didn&#39;t adress them completley or something like this. I&#39;m waiting for you response to the arguments you ignored.

[Okocim]

Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 04, 2007 08:48 pm
"The same thing you meant when you assumed I hold my stance merely because I happen to be Jewish."

so you mean you can&#39;t find any reason why one would support Palestine, unless he got a personal realtion to it??
that was similar to my argument. but the difference was, as this fourm have proven, in no way you have to be muslim to support Palestine, since the vast vast majority on this forum supports Palestine without being muslims.
but you have been proven wrong since most posters here are both non-muslim and anti-colonialism and zionism.

when I said stick to the argument, I meant all the other arguments, not the one of you being Jewish; the arguments which you didn&#39;t want to answer coz I didn&#39;t adress them completley or something like this. I&#39;m waiting for you response to the arguments you ignored.
Given the current kautskyite climate on the left in various countries towards muslims, it doesn&#39;t surprise me.

But back to the point, I gave you the points you ignored and you continued to ignore them.

[EwokUtopia]

Okocim-

You cant seriously pretend to be a Marxist and at the same time make absurd comments that say that the Jewish State was justified because it was given to them by the British. If the British gave India to the Irish, would that be justified? NO because India and Palestine were both stolen by the British, and in particular the British Ruling Class who gained these lands for the price of working class soldiers blood.

Tell me one thing Okocim, when and how did the British aquire Palestine, and how was it justifiable?

[Janus]

Merged.

[Revolution Until Victory]

"I gave you the points you ignored and you continued to ignore them."

what??? when???
tell me what are they now, and I&#39;ll respond to them.

[Phalanx]

sorry if you misunderstood me, but I meant the Jewish people were living in realtive harmony and had their Golden Age IN THE ARAB WORLD, before zionism, not all around the world.

Yeah, I&#39;ll definately agree with that.

[Raj Radical]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 08:02 pm
Okocim-

You cant seriously pretend to be a Marxist and at the same time make absurd comments that say that the Jewish State was justified because it was given to them by the British. If the British gave India to the Irish, would that be justified? NO because India and Palestine were both stolen by the British, and in particular the British Ruling Class who gained these lands for the price of working class soldiers blood.

Tell me one thing Okocim, when and how did the British aquire Palestine, and how was it justifiable?
How did the Assyrians, how did the Persians, how did the Greeks, how did the Romans, how did the Arabs, how did the British, how did the Jews?

How has anyone acquired Palestine by justifiable means?

[Okocim]

Originally posted by Revolution Until Victory+May 04, 2007 09:53 pm--> (Revolution Until Victory &#064; May 04, 2007 09:53 pm)"I gave you the points you ignored and you continued to ignore them."

what??? when???
tell me what are they now, and I&#39;ll respond to them.[/b]
the one where i quote you saying "the holy quran", address them along with your previous post and i will answer. I thought it was fairly clear which bit I repeated for you based on the fact that i copied the exact same words i&#39;d used before and the fact you only quoted half the post that my repeat was in ffs, how could you not see?


Raj [email protected] 04, 2007 11:43 pm
How did the Assyrians, how did the Persians, how did the Greeks, how did the Romans, how did the Arabs, how did the British, how did the Jews?

How has anyone acquired Palestine by justifiable means?
there were no "palestinians" pre-1960s.

[Revolution Until Victory]

there were no "palestinians" pre-1960s.

first of all, there was no Algerians, no Kenyans, Congolese, Guatemalens, Neigerians, etc. before they got their independence. that is irrelivant. although, actually, Palestinains were called Palestinains since during the Ottman colonization.

Okocim, I have no idea what you are talking about??
what "holy Quran" part?
tell me exaclty what you want me to respond to.
but still, you can&#39;t use this excuse to not asnwer. You have ignored sooo many of our posts, yet we ALWAYS responded. this is not a good excuse to not respond.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Raj [email protected] 04, 2007 10:43 pm
How did the Assyrians, how did the Persians, how did the Greeks, how did the Romans, how did the Arabs, how did the British, how did the Jews?

How has anyone acquired Palestine by justifiable means?
When the British did it, it was at a point where concepts like international law existed. When the Arabs did it, they did not kick everyone else out, but rather intermarried with the local population (which was a myriad of all the people who lived there prior to this point) and the Arabic language slowly became the language of Palestine and its people.

"Arab" is more than anything else a linguistic identification. The Palestinian people are decended from Canaanites, Ancient Hebrews, Romans, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Philistines, Medieval Jewish refugee&#39;s, Turks, Crusaders, Mongols, and pretty well everyone else who lived in the region. A hopeful long term solution to this would be the continuation of this trend, IE the intermarriage of all the people who currently live there, but this takes a long time.



Anyway, your point is fallacious. There is an extreme difference between stealing land 3000 years ago and stealing it 100 years ago, Humanity has come a long way since the Bronze age. The situation in modern Palestine is extremely different to the situation of Palestine in 600 CE, or 0CE, so basing modern situations on ancient examples is perhaps one of the most moronic approaches to this issue. As a supposed leftist, you should know better.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2007 01:07 am
How has anyone acquired Palestine by justifiable means?
there were no "palestinians" pre-1960s. [/quote]
While this can be contested (and basically this stance has had the shit kicked out of it everytime you can bring it up), there is no way in hell you can argue that there were Israeli&#39;s pre-1948. So what are you trying to say, that since the Palestinians had no nation-state at this point, it was OK for Zionists to create one on their land? Or is your justification so delusional that you take this point to the conclusion that Palestine was completely uninhabbited until the Zionists came?

Even though there were Palestinians before the 60&#39;s, tell me why it would matter if there werent, while it doesnt matter that there were no Israeli&#39;s pre-1948?

Hell, even Zionists called the land Palestine before 1948. It clearly existed. Israel didnt.

And dont say "Israel existed thousands of years ago" because this is an absolutely moot point rooted in religious motifs for state creation. I suppose we should re-establish a Pictish kingdom in Scotland, or maybe bring Dacia back to Romania. Both these examples are more recent than Ancient Israel. Modern Jews and Ancient Hebrews are as different from one another as an Italian is different from a Roman.

[Phalanx]

there were no "palestinians" pre-1960s.

That makes no difference. Native Americans didn&#39;t constitute a nation when Europeans arrived, but we can all agree that the land was stolen from its original owners. The same situation holds true in Palestine.

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by Okocim+May 05, 2007 01:07 am--> (Okocim @ May 05, 2007 01:07 am)
Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 04, 2007 09:53 pm
"I gave you the points you ignored and you continued to ignore them."

what??? when???
tell me what are they now, and I&#39;ll respond to them.
the one where i quote you saying "the holy quran", address them along with your previous post and i will answer. I thought it was fairly clear which bit I repeated for you based on the fact that i copied the exact same words i&#39;d used before and the fact you only quoted half the post that my repeat was in ffs, how could you not see?


Raj [email protected] 04, 2007 11:43 pm
How did the Assyrians, how did the Persians, how did the Greeks, how did the Romans, how did the Arabs, how did the British, how did the Jews?

How has anyone acquired Palestine by justifiable means?
there were no "palestinians" pre-1960s. [/b]
This is all the evidence needed to prove you&#39;re not a Communist.

There were no Palestinians pre-1960&#39;s?

What are you saying? I&#39;ve only heard that "let&#39;s deny even acknowledging the existence of these people" from ultra-orthodox Jewish supremacists, and their counterparts among Arab nationalists, White nationalists, black nationalists, etc.

There always have been a people in Palestine. Call them what you want, but they&#39;ve been there, and deserve a home and a life and recognition just as much as any Israeli.

[Raj Radical]

Originally posted by EwokUtopia+May 05, 2007 03:48 am--> (EwokUtopia @ May 05, 2007 03:48 am)
Raj [email protected] 04, 2007 10:43 pm
How did the Assyrians, how did the Persians, how did the Greeks, how did the Romans, how did the Arabs, how did the British, how did the Jews?

How has anyone acquired Palestine by justifiable means?
When the British did it, it was at a point where concepts like international law existed. When the Arabs did it, they did not kick everyone else out, but rather intermarried with the local population (which was a myriad of all the people who lived there prior to this point) and the Arabic language slowly became the language of Palestine and its people.

"Arab" is more than anything else a linguistic identification. The Palestinian people are decended from Canaanites, Ancient Hebrews, Romans, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Philistines, Medieval Jewish refugee&#39;s, Turks, Crusaders, Mongols, and pretty well everyone else who lived in the region. A hopeful long term solution to this would be the continuation of this trend, IE the intermarriage of all the people who currently live there, but this takes a long time.



Anyway, your point is fallacious. There is an extreme difference between stealing land 3000 years ago and stealing it 100 years ago, Humanity has come a long way since the Bronze age. The situation in modern Palestine is extremely different to the situation of Palestine in 600 CE, or 0CE, so basing modern situations on ancient examples is perhaps one of the most moronic approaches to this issue. As a supposed leftist, you should know better. [/b]
The Palestinians are not a product of intermarriage. Palestinians are predominantly, to use the term lightly, Arab. The purest Arab blood in the middle east.

When conducting genetic tests, Palestinians are often used as a reference point.

Also, your interpretation of the Muslim Empire as benevolent toward indeginous populations is a misinterpretation. The only reason Jews were not expelled from Palestine when it was brought under Muslim rule was because the Caliph decreed that Jews should only be allowed to exist on the fringes of the Arabian Peninsula. Many of the Jews living in Arabia proper were deported to Palestine.

[graffic]

Reading this thread it looks like Okocim has pawned virtually everyone so people are posting shit up to hide their embarrassment

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Raj [email protected] 07, 2007 08:15 am
The Palestinians are not a product of intermarriage. Palestinians are predominantly, to use the term lightly, Arab. The purest Arab blood in the middle east.

When conducting genetic tests, Palestinians are often used as a reference point.

Right.....so the Palestinians are more Arab than the Arabians....Id like to see where you got this from.

And what happened to the Canaanites, Philistines, unexpelled Hebrews, Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Persians and everyone else? Were they all good and celibate, and just magically disappeared?

Also, Id like you to show me these genetic tests.




Also, your interpretation of the Muslim Empire as benevolent toward indeginous populations is a misinterpretation. The only reason Jews were not expelled from Palestine when it was brought under Muslim rule was because the Caliph decreed that Jews should only be allowed to exist on the fringes of the Arabian Peninsula. Many of the Jews living in Arabia proper were deported to Palestine.

You make it out like I have some sort of emotional attachment to the Islamic Empires. This is ancient history, and is not something to get all hung up on or take anachronistic opinions about. The Islamic Empires occurred at a state of time when humanity was extremely primitive by modern standards, and all of the so-called "great civilizations" were brutal and savage, with the exception to perhaps some indigenous cultures of what would later become the America&#39;s. The Islamic Caliphate was certainly brutal and savage, but when compared with Christian European kingdoms, it was rather ahead of its time, that is unless you can say to me with a straight face that medieval muslims were worse to the Jews than Medieval Christians.

Anyways, this is ancient history, and we should not base this conflict on things that happened millenia ago, that is absolutely stupid. We need to think to the future, and try to make it a future where Sephardics, Palestinians, Bedouins, Mizrahics, Jordanians, Armenians, Samaritans, Druze, Roma, Ashkenazics and Syrians can all live in a free, peaceful, and equal Palestine.

[Okocim]

how comes i&#39;m restricted but other zionists are not?


Originally posted by Revolution Until Victory+May 05, 2007 02:14 am--> (Revolution Until Victory &#064; May 05, 2007 02:14 am)
there were no "palestinians" pre-1960s.

first of all, there was no Algerians, no Kenyans, Congolese, Guatemalens, Neigerians, etc. before they got their independence. that is irrelivant. although, actually, Palestinains were called Palestinains since during the Ottman colonization.[/b]

er...no they weren&#39;t .They popped up in the 1960s as a ploy to go crying to the west about having no land. They got fucking land, they&#39;re arab.



Originally posted by Revolution Until [email protected] 05, 2007 02:14 am
Okocim, I have no idea what you are talking about??

damn...you&#39;re slow.

I said:

[email protected] 04, 2007 07:35 pm
It is not "crap". Would you like real (as opposed to your fake Jewish quotes) quotes of Arab attitudes towards Jews? Of what their children are taught in their schools? Of what their holy book calls us? Of what their leaders have said?

you only focussed on the bit which made me out as a Jew, not the other points, now if you want to continue this charade fucking well answer the other points, would you like that information? and for my ease, reanswer the whole post that that particular bit came from (copy and paste your answer where you ignored that bit if you want) so that my 1 post can be answered by your one post. keep things simple, stop you ignoring stuff again. :rolleyes:





and btw: hamas not anti-Semitic? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA&#33;&#33;&#33; &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

*breathes*

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA&#33; AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA&#33; AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA&#33; AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA&#33; :lol:

[Revolution Until Victory]

"They popped up in the 1960s as a ploy to go crying to the west about having no land. They got fucking land, they&#39;re arab."

lies, lies, and more lies.

you retard.
do you call that a point??
"It is not "crap". Would you like real (as opposed to your fake Jewish quotes) quotes of Arab attitudes towards Jews? Of what their children are taught in their schools? Of what their holy book calls us? Of what their leaders have said?"

that wasn&#39;t a point.
but to deny you any stupid excuses, no I don&#39;t want you to provide me with more of your racist and desparate lies.
now answer the poinst you ignored.

and yes, Hamas isn&#39;t anti-semetic.

[Okocim]

answer my fucking post idiot.

[Question everything]

er...no they weren&#39;t .They popped up in the 1960s as a ploy to go crying to the west about having no land. They got fucking land, they&#39;re arab.

Are you some kinda Racist? I mean that&#39;s like saying back in the 1500s "The Carribean has been colonized, but the natives have plenty of land, they are native"

[Revolution Until Victory]

"answer my fucking post idiot"

what the hell are you talking about?????

You yourself admited I answered everything except for "It is not "crap". Would you like real (as opposed to your fake Jewish quotes) quotes of Arab attitudes towards Jews? Of what their children are taught in their schools? Of what their holy book calls us? Of what their leaders have said?"

and even that I&#39;ve answerd. What know??
is there anything else I haven&#39;t asnwerd??
stop coming up with baseless excuses and answer my points you continue to ignore.

[Okocim]

i also asked you to use the <quote> tags and answer my whole post in its entirety so i could repond without having to search for fragments all over the place due to your initial stupidity.



and what do you mean you don&#39;t want examples of arab racism? what? can&#39;t arabs be racist? is it the Jews filling pali schools with anti-Jewish propaganda?

idiot.

[Question everything]

Originally posted by Question [email protected] 13, 2007 10:03 pm

er...no they weren&#39;t .They popped up in the 1960s as a ploy to go crying to the west about having no land. They got fucking land, they&#39;re arab.

Are you some kinda Racist? I mean that&#39;s like saying back in the 1500s "The Carribean has been colonized, but the natives have plenty of land, they are native"
Reply.

[Revolution Until Victory]

also asked you to use the <quote> tags and answer my whole post in its entirety so i could repond without having to search for fragments all over the place due to your initial stupidity.

I do use them except when it&#39;s only a fast reply.
so, it&#39;s now "my stupidty"???



and what do you mean you don&#39;t want examples of arab racism?

I didn&#39;t say that. I meant I didn&#39;t want you to give me propaganda and lies from racist, right-wing zionist websites. I have enough of them daily, no need for you to re-post them.
if we gonna start a match of collecting evidence of racims on both sides, we will never finish. That isn&#39;t the issue.
why the hell do you keep coming up with stupid excuse? just answer my post that you have been ignoring for weeks (and forget about all the other posts you ignored from me and many other members long ago)

[Okocim]

no. you ignored part of my post, if you want me to answer give me an answer to my entire post. it&#39;s not hard so get on with it.

[Revolution Until Victory]

WHAT ON EARTH ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??????

wich part of your post did I ignore???
even if I ignored all of you posts, you still have to respond to any points I make. that isn&#39;t a good excuse for you to say "respond first and then I&#39;ll respond"

even still, I gave you an answer to the part you accuse me of ignoring.
the asnwer was: no, I&#39;m daily exposed to zionist propaganda, no need for you to re-post it and parot it here. If I want racist right-wing zionist propaganda, I can myself go to the hundreds of zionist websites myself. no need to post them here.

NOW ANSWER MY POST WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN IGNORING FOR WEEKS

[Question everything]

why am I not suprised that Okocim refuses to respond to my post?

[Okocim]

Originally posted by Question [email protected] 14, 2007 01:05 am
why am I not suprised that Okocim refuses to respond to my post?
I didn&#39;t really understand your point to be perfectly honest.

explain again please?






and I don&#39;t know, maybe english isn&#39;t Revolution Until Victory&#39;s first language, do you reckon you could explain to him what I want him to do because he doesn&#39;t seem to understand when I ask him please? I want him to put all his fragments of replies to my one post and then post them as one response so i can reply with one rather than trying to piece together a million and one single irrelevant sentences. I thought that was fairly clear.

[Revolution Until Victory]

"I want him to put all his fragments of replies to my one post and then post them as one response "

OMG what a retard&#33;
I didn&#39;t have any fragments of replys. If i did, with out asking me to, I would have given them in one post.
instead, there is this one complete post which you ingored. asnwer that one. It&#39;s not diffecult, just go back to I think page 4 and you will find it.
nothing complicated in this.

[Phalanx]

If you guys can&#39;t have an intelligent discussion this thread should be closed.

[Question everything]

"Are you some kinda Racist? I mean that&#39;s like saying back in the 1500s "The Carribean has been colonized, but the natives have plenty of land, they are native" - Me

This is a referance to you saying that Palestinains had plenty of land since they are arab. Simply because "Arabs" have alot of Land does not mean that Israel has a right to Uproot PALESTINIANS from their homes, and justify it by saying that "Arabs" have plenty of Land. It&#39;s a very stupid response.

[graffic]

If the Arabs (Moslems) put down their weapons today there would be no more violence. If the Israelis put down their weapons today there would be no more Israel.
Think about it...

[Question everything]

... dumbass.


If the Arabs (Moslems) put down their weapons today there would be no more violence.
If had Martin Luther King stopped Protesting there would be No More Violence.


If the Israelis put down their weapons today there would be no more Israel.
Think about it...

Had the The Government Stopped Releasing the Hounds on them there would be no more racism...

Think about that...