• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Israeli foreign minister: Redraw map to oust Arabs

JEDIYoda said:
I don`t get what the big deal is???
If you know anything about the guy and the party he represents what he is saying makes sense.....
But in the big picture it will never happen!!
Click to expand...


If it's not such a big deal, why does CBS feel a need to report on it 😕
 
JEDIYoda said:
Why does Fox news and other news organizations report stuff that has no value other than taking up air time....go figure..no big deal!!
Click to expand...

To you it's no big deal!! To 1/5 of the Israeli population it is a huge deal.

"Israel's foreign minister said Monday that some Israeli Arabs should be stripped of their citizenship and placed under Palestinian sovereignty as part of any final peace deal."

http://www.boston.com/news/world/mi...li_foreign_minister_redraw_map_to_oust_arabs/


I guess it is hard to redraw the map when you don't have defined borders.
 
JEDIYoda said:
I don`t get what the big deal is???
If you know anything about the guy and the party he represents what he is saying makes sense.....
But in the big picture it will never happen!!
Click to expand...

Let us know when the Netanyahu govt denounces it, OK?

Oh, wait- He's part of the government... Netanyahu's sock puppet...

Plausible deniability is a great thing, huh?

You're right about one thing- the Netanyahu govt won't give up anything they don't have to give up, particularly not a square inch of West Bank territory. They've never negotiated in good faith, and they never will. Even as they talk about a two state solution, their actions make that less and less likely every day. They intend to take it all, one parcel at a time.
 
I have been telling this forum for years that Netanyuhu, Lieberman and the crazed settler parties coalition was planning to oust all its Arab citizens at first opportunity. And then when its actually stated by Lieberman himself, JEDIY pretends to deny it, but I don't see Netanyuhu firing Lieberman or telling him to STFU

Who speaks louder, Netanyuhu or JEDIY.

After all, when Lieberman speaks, Bozo Netanyuhu asks how high he must jump. As what Lieberman says goes over like a lead balloon internationally. And now its the job of Netanyuhu and AIPAC to demand the US Congress and President jump and dance to the Lieberman plan.
 
Anarchist420 said:
Democracy is the same as monarchy. It's a government, so it sucks.
Click to expand...

Man, you could use being put in an environment with no government, and raped, tortured and made a slave in the first day so we could ask you to post again about government.

You have some psychological problem about government that if it does something good for you you scream and if non-government punches you in the face you smell sweet freedom.

Until you learn that, you are a one-note parrot who just reposts the same crazy point over and over every post. No better than the 'truthers' and 'birthers' misguidedly obsessed.

The fact you say 'monarchy is the same as democracy' should give you a little clue you are far, far from our founding fathers and our nation's values.

Who needs the people to have a vote, instead of being ruled by a dictator?

All the same thing to crazy Anarchist.

Now, it may be that money's corruption has crippled the value of our democracy, but that's another issue.

We're still a hell of a lot better off with the vote, and with either system over 'anarchy'.

That's the position of someone who REALLY appreciates freedom and understands the social issues required for it and that anarchy leads to the tyranny of the private gang.

Anarchist is as much a fundamentalist as the most fundy evangelical or Muslim, with his blinders on to the issues only obsessed with his ideological dogma to be implemented.

I feel bad for him, because unlike some of the sons of bitches who just don't care about supporting bad wars or economic tyranny, he's not guided by such bad values.

He thinks he wants freedom, but like the guy who thinks the only problem with communism was not being ENOUGH communism and that would fix it, he's wrong.

How does he think Somalia - which for the sake of discussion let's say has no government - gets out of that situation? Maybe they all have a Ron Paul lovefest meeting and discuss how great it would be if they stopped slaughtering the enemy warlords' people and formed a productive economy, without any hint of 'government'? Yes, good plan their Anarchist.
 
Craig234 said:
Man, you could use being put in an environment with no government, and raped, tortured and made a slave in the first day so we could ask you to post again about government.

You have some psychological problem about government that if it does something good for you you scream and if non-government punches you in the face you smell sweet freedom.

Until you learn that, you are a one-note parrot who just reposts the same crazy point over and over every post. No better than the 'truthers' and 'birthers' misguidedly obsessed.

The fact you say 'monarchy is the same as democracy' should give you a little clue you are far, far from our founding fathers and our nation's values.

Who needs the people to have a vote, instead of being ruled by a dictator?

All the same thing to crazy Anarchist.

Now, it may be that money's corruption has crippled the value of our democracy, but that's another issue.

We're still a hell of a lot better off with the vote, and with either system over 'anarchy'.

That's the position of someone who REALLY appreciates freedom and understands the social issues required for it and that anarchy leads to the tyranny of the private gang.

Anarchist is as much a fundamentalist as the most fundy evangelical or Muslim, with his blinders on to the issues only obsessed with his ideological dogma to be implemented.

I feel bad for him, because unlike some of the sons of bitches who just don't care about supporting bad wars or economic tyranny, he's not guided by such bad values.

He thinks he wants freedom, but like the guy who thinks the only problem with communism was not being ENOUGH communism and that would fix it, he's wrong.

How does he think Somalia - which for the sake of discussion let's say has no government - gets out of that situation? Maybe they all have a Ron Paul lovefest meeting and discuss how great it would be if they stopped slaughtering the enemy warlords' people and formed a productive economy, without any hint of 'government'? Yes, good plan their Anarchist.
Click to expand...
I'll really see how useless the government is when hyperinflation kicks in, when more martial law is declared, and/or if foreign invaders ever do wage war against Americans in America. That would enslave me just as much as any stateless society could. I've never said the world would be 100% free of tyranny if there was anarchy anyway. However, people kill whether there is a government or not. The Federal government protected slavery.

As for Somalia, the U.S. government is forcefully trying to set up a government so no anarchists would move there.
 
Lemon law said:
I have been telling this forum for years that Netanyuhu, Lieberman and the crazed settler parties coalition was planning to oust all its Arab citizens at first opportunity. And then when its actually stated by Lieberman himself, JEDIY pretends to deny it, but I don't see Netanyuhu firing Lieberman or telling him to STFU

Who speaks louder, Netanyuhu or JEDIY.

After all, when Lieberman speaks, Bozo Netanyuhu asks how high he must jump. As what Lieberman says goes over like a lead balloon internationally. And now its the job of Netanyuhu and AIPAC to demand the US Congress and President jump and dance to the Lieberman plan.
Click to expand...

Both of these men represent political partys that are vastly different in ideology and the way thiings should be done....

Avigdor Lieberman, leader of the Yisrael Beiteinu party, also a highly controversial figure.

Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu (born October 21, 1949) is the current Prime Minister of Israel. He serves also as the Chairman of the Likud Party.

Even as foreign minister he promotes his parties goals and thoughts concerniong different subjects.

The reason this is a non - issue is because Avigdor Lieberman`s party is NOT running the government....as such it is truly a non-issue. That is if you actually knew anything about Israeli politics!
 
Let us all understand the genius of the Lieberman plan. As Arab Israelis, who constitute 20% of the Israeli voters, also still presumably legitimately own their share of property in 1948 Israel.

So accordingly, under the Lieberman plan, those Israeli Arabs will be deported to the West Bank, and in the process will have their land ownership become forfeit to the Israeli state. And even better yet, Israel will be able to demand a greater share of the West Bank to compensate for disenfranchising its Arab Citizens.

What a deal what a deal, if and only if you are a crazed Israeli pig like Lieberman and his ilk who are going off the total radical deep end.

That is just the point, most Jews and Israeli citizens are not so greedy or piggish, but until those that are realistic and rational inside of Israel stand up and vote out their crazies, the entire nation of Israel will become as reviled as Lieberman.

And yes JEDIY as you say, "The reason this is a non - issue is because Avigdor Lieberman`s party is NOT running the government....as such it is truly a non-issue. That is if you actually knew anything about Israeli politics! "

And yes, JediY, I know a lot more than you do about Israeli politics, I just watch the Israeli actual deeds, and don't blindly believe in Israeli propaganda.

I judge things by deeds and not political spin bullshit, pardon me if I judge things by my own American values of fairness.

Bottom line JEDIY, until Israelis, at the ballot box, give Netanyuhu and Lieberman , and their fellow settler party crazies the ole heave ho, the shoe will fit, and all Israelis must wear the Lieberman crazy label.

Learn it and live it Jediy, are you part of the Israeli problem or any part of the solution?
 
Last edited:
cybrsage said:
No, but I do have a penchant for expecting people to be consistent...something you appear to be allergic to.
Click to expand...

So, uhh, you're saying that throwing out your own citizens is the same thing as wanting to return to your homeland, right?
 
The Middle East war is not now and never was a conflict between Israelis/Jews on the one hand and Palestinians on the other. In fact, the Arab-"Palestinians", while currently the perpetrators of most of the anti-Jewish atrocities, were never a very important part of the conflict. In fact, before about 1970, virtually no one in the world considered the Middle East conflict to be one between Israelis and Palestinians.

The term "Palestinian" itself had referred to Israeli Jews back in the 1940s, and had been slowly deconstructed and redefined to refer to the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza. The Middle East Conflict was always a war by Arabs against Jews, not a conflict between Israelis and "Palestinians." The war was repackaged as a conflict between Jews and Palestinians as a public relations gimmick by the Arab fascist regimes. These regimes had never had any interest in "Palestinians," in creating a "Palestinian" state, or in "Palestinian nationalism" before 1967. That is because Palestinian nationalism did not and DOES NOT exist. The Palestinians were a regional group of Arabs having virtually no cultural nor national distinctive traits separating them from Syrians, Lebanese, and Jordanians. They are all basically Arabs!.

The bulk of what are called "Palestinian Arabs" are members of families who migrated into the Land of Israel beginning in the late 19th century. Palestinian nationalism is a mislabeling of Arab nationalism. Arab nationalism exists, although it is closely bound up with Islamic nationalism and even Islamism. Palestinian nationalism, however, is a phantom. It is nothing more than genocidal hatred of Jews.

The Arab assaults and aggressions against Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1968, and 1973 had nothing to do with Palestinians. The Palestinian terror campaign would itself be easy to suppress today and eradicate if the Middle East conflict were really a Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Israel would simply obliterate the terrorists and expel their supporters to Syria and Lebanon. The Middle East war continues because it is really an Arab-Israeli war, not an Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is also in large part a war between barbarism and civilization. In many ways an Islamic religious jihad against the Jews.

bmand.gif

transj.gif

1947mapa.gif

1949mapa.gif

Pre-67.gif

1967mapb.gif

1982map1.gif


Israel was responsible for bringing about some of its own problems. The Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip were packed and ready to leave following their 1967 defeat. Suddenly the victorious one-eyed IDF General Moshe Dayan persuaded them to stay. This singular act stunned no one more than the Arab enemy himself who could not believe such an incredible manifestation of Jewish madness! After all, the Arabs knew what THEY would have done to the Jews if they had won.
 
kylebisme said:
Wow Liu, where did you get such a distorted view of history?
Click to expand...

His view is very accurate!!
As opposed to your views,,,,which do not lend themselves to much accuracy at all!
Case in point...World Trade center....now go away and redo your math.....lol
 
Here's on flagrant distortion of history from early in his post for example sake:

LiuKangBakinPie said:
The term "Palestinian" itself had referred to Israeli Jews back in the 1940s, and had been slowly deconstructed and redefined to refer to the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza.
Click to expand...

In reality, the term "Palestinian" is used multiple times in the 1947 UN Partition Plan to refer to all citizens of the British Mandate of Palestine, both Jewish and otherwise, has had been the case since 1922 when the League of Nations stipulated that:

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
Click to expand...

It was only before then that the people of the region weren't refereed to as Palestinians, but rather as residents of the various administrative districts within the that portion of the Greater Syria section of the Ottoman Empire. Also note the specific provision for Jewish immigration, which hints at the fact that, contrary to Liu's claim:

LiuKangBakinPie said:
The bulk of what are called "Palestinian Arabs" are members of families who migrated into the Land of Israel beginning in the late 19th century.
Click to expand...

In really The bulk of people who are now called "Israeli Jews" are members of families who migrated into the area beginning in the late 19th century, while most others in the region are at least partially descended from people who have been living there as far as recorded history goes back. Scour the documentation all you like, you'll find no evidence to support Lui's claim of large migration of Arabs into the Levant, it's pure fantasy.
 
Last edited:
kylebisme said:
Here's on flagrant distortion of history from early in his post for example sake:



In reality, the term "Palestinian" is used multiple times in the 1947 UN Partition Plan to refer to all citizens of the British Mandate of Palestine, both Jewish and otherwise, has had been the case since 1922 when the League of Nations stipulated that:



It was only before then that the people of the region weren't refereed to as Palestinians, but rather as residents of the various administrative districts within the that portion of the Greater Syria section of the Ottoman Empire. Also note the specific provision for Jewish immigration, which hints at the fact that, contrary to Liu's claim:



In really The bulk of people who are now called "Israeli Jews" are members of families who migrated into the area beginning in the late 19th century, while most others in the region are at least partially descended from people who have been living there as far as recorded history goes back. Scour the documentation all you like, you'll find no evidence to support Lui's claim of large migration of Arabs into the Levant, it's pure fantasy.
Click to expand...
And your statements are correct? I find nothing supporting them.

The term "Palestine" came from the name that the conquering Roman Empire gave the ancient Land of Israel in an attempt to obliterate and de-legitimize the Jewish presence in the Holy Land. The name "Palestine" was invented in the year 135 C.E. Before it was known as Judea, which was the southern kingdom of ancient Israel. The Roman Procurator in charge of the Judean-Israel territories was so angry at the Jews for revolting that he called for his historians and asked them who were the worst enemies of the Jews in their past history. The scribes said, "the Philistines." Thus, the Procurator declared that Land of Israel would from then forward be called "Philistia" [further bastardized into "Palaistina"] to dishonor the Jews and obliterate their history. Hence the name "Palestine."

There was no "Arab Palestinian" history before the Arabs manufactured one shortly after 1948, and then especially after the June 1967 Arab-Israeli War! In an interview with the Dutch newspaper "Trau" (March 31, 1977), PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein said, "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism. It is also been a "conceptual" war for ownership of the term "Palestinian" which has been transferred over to the Arabs whereas, before 1967, "Palestine" has always been synonymous with Eretz Israel and the Land of Israel.


"The war against Israel is not a war against Israel. It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there would have been no Israel, Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West. It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel, they can get everything. Therefore, it is not that the West has a stake in Israel. It is Israel."
Click to expand...
http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/news/article.php?id=3875

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28222
http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/meaning.html
http://israel.net/timetospeak/2.htm

"There are some violent conflicts in the world that simply do not lend themselves to resolution by either signatures or handshakes. The Arab-Israeli conflict is one of them. That is because there are no tangible, realistic exchanges that can be made between the two sides that would guarantee lasting peace. No exchange of territory, no compensation to refugees, no guarantee of statehood will quell the insistent [Arab-] "Palestinian" demand for Israel's extinction."
Click to expand...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33275

Map of Islamic Terrorist Network in America -
http://www.somebodyhelpme.info/Terrorist_network_map.gif
 
Last edited:
LiuKangBakinPie said:
And your statements are correct? I find nothing supporting them.
Click to expand...
All you have to do is click the links in my post to find the documents proving the use of the term "Palestinian" to refer to refer to all citizens of the British Mandate of Palestine, both Jewish and otherwise, decades before you claimed. As for the fact that Palestinians are at least partially descended from people who have been living there as far as recorded history goes back, all you have to do is look at the utter lack of any actual historical record any mass immigration to the region other than that of Jews beginning in the late 19th century
 to see that, though Wikipedia provides a reasonable overview of DNA and genetic studies which further prove as much.

LiuKangBakinPie said:
The name "Palestine" was invented in the year 135 C.E.
Click to expand...
Nonsense, as evidenced by the fact that Aristotle referred to the region as what translates from Greek to "Palestine" nearly half a millennium before that, and there are much earlier examples from Syrian and Egyptian texts, though none that I've been able to find online. Again I'm compelled to ask where you such a distorted view of history from, as it doesn't seem like you've made any effort to seek out objective sources.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top