Rue

I will say this for a poster who has asked I speak out as well. I have close friends who left Iran for Israel and Canada-some Jews, some Bahaiis, some Muslims. I also know gays, Zoroastreans who had to leave Iran. I don't claim to speak for Iranians. I do listen to many that came here to get away from the extremist fundamentalist theocracy. Iran had its issues with its Shah yes but it was a modern nation. Persians as I call Iranians because they are Persian, were not enemies of Israel or the West or anyone. Since the theocracy took over people have been living under tyranny. Brave Iranians-Persians have died, been tortured, trying to change the government. Students can and do die and get tortured as do journalists, etc. Ironically we have trendy leftists in this country who speak out saying the Hijab is something we should be tolerant of and yet in Iran it can be seen as a symbol of repression against women. We don't get what it means in Iran. We don't get what Iranians live with. We have idiots like the brother of Justin Trudeau who made a bull crap documentary extolling the virtues of the theocracy in Iran. I can only pray the people of Iran find their way out of their current situation and I think we should support the students, the people morally try break free. Its a struggle no different then people breaking free from the Communist regimes in the East of Europe at one point. Our Prime Minister should speak up a bit more. I know Iranians in Canada fear if they say anything their families back home might get it. I get that. So I just say to them, I think many of us hope your people win their battle for freedom.

No Argus with due respect Jordan occupied but never legally annexed the West Bank. They did not impose Jordanian citizenship on West Bank Palestinians. They would have had to for it to be considered a legal annexation. It was in fact an occupation in the layman sense no different than what Israel is doing now. Big difference. Israel did drive Jordan back in 1967 but not completely out. In fact Jordan could have stayed and fought, they chose to retreat at a certain point as they were fresh coming off the Black Sabbath uprising and had no desire to waste any soldiers remaining in any part of Jordan. In fact history now discloses had Israel had their way, Jordan would have annexed the West Bank as part of a few secret negotiations Golda Maer tried with King Hussein before and after the 67 war. Jordan joined on Egypt's side in 67 for fear of invasion by Syria, Iraq and Lebanon as Hussein's memoirs now indicate. Even during the 67 war he spoke with Golda Maer. Jordan hates Palestinians for refusing to become Jordanian Palestinians and siding with Arafat,

I think neither Jordan or Egypt want to inherit those two areas because I believe they both said that when asked in the past.Israel in fact asked Jordan to annex the West Bank as one proposal and Hussein said no chance. Gaza City was always Egyptian except for the occupation after 1967 until the peace dal with Egypt. The Gaza Strip was in fact a prison Egypt under Nasser created. Nasser openly ridiculed the Palestinians in that strip and want noth8ng to do with them. As for the 2 state solution it's a moot point at this time.

1-I am not questioning him being Jewish. He was born that way. I am not questioning he is a Rabbiah. He chose to be. I don't question the man's existence, right to his opinions. I do question the device of using a Jew the way its used on this response as I explained. I don' see Hudson-Jones-Kactus quoting Muslims who are pro Israel. The use of a Jewish Rabbiah as if his being Jewish and a Rabbiah is significant to the validity of his opinion is what I questioned. You choose to ignore what I am questioning. 2-The so called religious overtones and notions regarding Jerusalem orginate from Jewish, Christian and Muslim religious beliefs. As a Zionist and as a human being in my life and as a Jew, choose which one of those identities you need, I was taught to respect religious beliefs. I see three religions all with equal feelings and strong emotions that make certain believers feel a very emotional connection to Jerusalem. I think that emotion most certainly clouds judgement and rational discourse. Now that I sound like Spock from Star Trek I don't Judge any of these religions as less valid than the other. I do question people in the name of any religion who engage in violence and terrorism. 3-In regards to 3, I made my concerns extremely clear. I challenge the need to use a Jewish Rabbiah to make the opinion "more valid" and I explained why. Its playing the Jw card and suggesting a good Jew will think lie this individual. His Jewishness should not be relevant to his opinion. His opinion is no more or less valid than any other human on this planet. In fact he does not disagree with many of my positions so you again misrepresent what I am disputing. If I had an ulterior motive I would not attempt to explain it so openly as I have with you many times by the way. 4-History? What time line do you use and when did you start your analysis? From when did you start your arbitrary time line? Come on we have been through that argument infinite times. In regards to the West Bank since 1949 the history speaks for itself and there in fact was since 1967 an influx of Israeli settlers to the West Bank now living in area C of three zones. Area A as you are well aware is Palestinian self ruled and exclusively Palestinian, Area B is simply an arbitrary designation of non Jewish Israeli settled land Israel maintains a military presence on and yes Area C is exclusively Israel settlements. Yes Area C has grown in size. No the size of 250,000 Hasidic Jews on the West Bank didn't just suddenly appear. They have been here since ancient days. Where I challenge your classification as I have stated is that many of the people you refer to as Palestinians in area A are as foreign to the West Bank as any Israeli Jewish settler. They came to this area and were not Palestinian but now choose to identify as Palestinians and they form the majority of Palestinians who are not Jewish on the West Bank. In your scenario, any Muslim who came to the West Bank is a Palestinian but if a Jewish Israeli came to the West Bank they have a lesser right to land ownership there than does a Muslim who came to this area. What I have argued is that at a state level there is a dispute as to whether the West Bank should be made into a second Palestinian state because Jordan wa sin fact unilaterally created as a Jewish free Palestinian state, illegally and is always ignored by revisionist historians such as yourself pretending its not a Palestinian state and is Jewish free. What I have also stated is the West Bank has never been part of a sovereign nation and therefore remains legally in dispute, and its incorrect to say its occupied. You can not in international law occupy land that was never part of a sovereign nation. From a layman's use of the word, it is occupied but not under international law and the resolutions from the UN you quote can not alter that they can only make political subjective opinions that are not binding as they do stating the West Bank should be a second Palestinian state. However the UN can not demand and has never demanded Israel withdraw to unsafe borders. It can not say that. It also can not order 250,000 non Israeli Hasidic Jews who do not recognize Israel as a state to move to Israel or leave. It can not order Jews or Christians who have legitimate private land titles to arbitrarily give them up any more than it can take sides between internal Palestinian disputes over whose land title rights take precedent, the land title rights of Palestinians prior to 1949 and the ones after that date. There are many laws that can not be ignored and are in discussions about this issue. The Christian land title rights to 90% of Jerusalem which Israel recognizes but the Arab League and Palestinians do not, is as much an unresolved issue as is the Muslim collective religious belief in the Middle East that there can be not just a Jewish nation of Israel but any nation other than a Muslim nation imposing sharia law which defines non Muslims with lesser legal rights including not having the right to own land of any kind. I have stated numerous times froma practical perspective to obtain a peaceful resolution all three religions would have to create a trilateral council in Jerusalem to allow access to religious sites for all 3 religions. That was tried but the Arab League and Palestinians and Muslim mullah walked out of that council saying hey would never except any recognition of Christian or Jewish legal right to land or nationality in ANY part of the Middle East not just Jerusalem. In four attempts Israel unilaterally agreed to give back 95% of the physical land of the West Bank and share East Jerusalem That is public record. Rabin, Barak, Olmert, Peres, That is now a moot point. Arafat told the world he had been bargaining in bad faith all along and never would concede to a Jewish state of Israel anywhere in the world let alone the Middle East. Abbas has repeated that countless times as has The Arab League of Nations, Iran and the PA and Hamas. As we speak Hamas is in a declared state of war to remove the Jewish state. So is Al Fatah the so called military wing of the PA. So is Hezbollah. So is Iran. Lebanon and Syria are in a declared state of war against Israel since 1949 as are all Arab League nations except Egypt and Jordan. There is no Muslim leader today in any Muslim country who could state he believes recognition of Israel being a Jewish state is a common sense condition for peace as is disarming terrorist groups, the same two conditions the IRA agreed to to achieve peace. Next and final point. The British were given a mandate by the League of Nations to create two states one Jewish and one Muslim in the area called Palestine. 90% of it was made a Jewish free Palestinian state illegally by the British in direct contradiction to its mandate. In fact the League of Nations called a meeting to disband Transjordan but that meeting never took place as eventfully Hitler declared war on Poland triggering WW2. Jordan was and has always been a Palestinian state illegally made up of 90% of land that was supposed to be shared fairly between Jews and Muslims in two nations. Stop ignoring that fact. Stop ignoring the fact Israel was created in direct defiance of former German Nazis running puppet states in Egypt, Iraq and Syria in full alliance with the French and British and then later Soviets. Stop ignoring the fact that the Arab League of nations was a colonial puppet invention and had a mandate to stop a Jewish state for fear Jews would ally their state with and help Muslim states making the West's ability to control the oil supplies problematic. Also you want to quite me then state I think the UN is a friggin joke. It ceased having any meaning to Jews when it turned its back on us after the holocaust and ignored Elenor Roosevelt who despite its absolue ignoring of Jewish refugees in WW2 took the UN and even Truman on to get Israel created. The UN abandon Jews as th Arab League unilaterally began a second attempt to exterminate us and again ignores as as 900,000 Jews were ethnically cleansed from Arab League nations. Not one Jewish refugee has been offered refuge by the UN. It was Israel and then France and the US that actually took in Jews. Canada sent Jews away and McKenzie King referred to us as rats and vermin. So spare me the history lessons. The UN sided with Palestinians giving them a refufee definition no othr refugee is allowed on this planet. Its allowed itself to be used as a military weapon on the ground by Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad including using its sites to store and transport terrorists and their military weapons It no longer has any relevance to stopping terrorism, or world instability. Its a hot air mouthpiece.

Do you call Jordan a Palestinian apartheid state? It was created illegally from 90% of Palestine and prevents Jews from being citizens in its state and it was and has always referred to itself in its charter as a Jew free Palestinian state and in fact is. How about the 900,000 Jews expelled from the Arab League of Nations? Were they equal citizens in their nations and asked to leave because of equality or was it ethnic cleansing hmmm? Do you point out that in the Arab League Nations, practice sharia law which states that a non Muslim is inferior legally to a Muslim and can not own land or do business directly with a Jew and must live in specific areas and not intermix with Muslims and their election rights for representatives may not even exist or are limited as is their physical movement day to day? Hmmm? In your world do you have any awareness of what Sharia Law is and what dhimmitude is and how non Muslims live in Muslim states? You want to talk apartheid? Do you talk of the slave trade now going on which ships black Muslim Africans and Fillipinos, Indonesians, Pakistanis and Bangla Deshis to Arab countries as slave labour? Who you? Have you mentioned Qatar has a population of only 250,000 and has another 300,000 non citizens who have no legal rights and service them? Have you any idea how Palestinians are treated in Arab League nations let alone Christians, Jews, Bahaiis, Zorostreans, Kurds, Berbers, Yazidi to name a few groups? Of course not. Now the designated areas on the West Bank are problematic legally but I have explained it in terms you can not grasp and that is, where Israel has caused a legal problem is not in going on to uncontested land that was never part of a sovereign country but in administering Israeli settlers with civilian law, but non Israeli Palestinians on the West Bank including 250,000 Jews who do NOT recognize the validity of the state of Israel by its military governorship. By not using the same type of administration for both it breaks an ctual international law. That is a legal issue you and the anti Israelis on this board can not grasp. As for the restrictions on Palestinians and their movement, where you make an epic failure once again calling it apartheid, is that this exact same set of restrictions is implemented exactly the same on Israeli settlers. I know because unlike you I was there and the spit into the face of Israeli soldiers comes from both Israelis and Palestinians something you have zero clue about. IDF are spit on by both sides. You don't have a clue because you can not understand both Israelis and Palestinians on the West Bank are subject to the same security restrictions, the exact same. What you have no clue about is that Palestinian children are taken to and treated in Israeli hospitals and even the leaders of the PA and Hamas sent their families for treatment inside Israel. What you do not also understand is that only some of the land disputes are between Israeli settlers and Palestinians on a federal state government level. In fact the vast majority of land disputes are not between Israelis and Palestinians but between non Israeli Palestinians, i.e., those Muslim Arabs who came to Palestine from the 1920's to present date and have illegally taken over land on the West Bank from Palestinians who were there prior to the 1920's and who have been there since. You don't have a clue that the inter Palestinian land titles dispute created a civil war between Palestinians and Arafat in a panic, blew up the land titles office on the West Bank so neither incoming Muslim Arabs or older Muslim Arabs on the West Bank would have a legal title basis to fight one another and distract from his war against Israel. You don't get there are 250,000 Hasidic Jews in and around Hebron that are not Israeli, have never been Israeli and do not believe in Israel's existence but simply because they are Jews are discriminated against and treated as inferiors by Palestinian Muslims who believe they need to be expelled. You do not get that the Palestinian Authority and Hamas believe in sharia law and dhimmitude an Islamic legal system that does not separate the religion from the state and denies any right of any Jew, Christian, Druze, non Muslim to any private land title. You don't get it because you limit your reality to a few anti Israeli internet sites. 90% of East Jerusalem has land titles in the name of Christian chuches which the PA and Hamas reject. Israel, the state, pays rent for use of such land, the PA and Hamas do not recognize it just as they do not recognize any Jewish or Christian land rights anywhere in the Middle East not just in pre 1967 Israel because of their belief in sharia law which defines non Muslims as not being capable of owning land let alone being nationality. Read the charters of Hamas and PA and Jordan and the Arab League states. Get back to me when you figure out what dhimmitude is and what the difference is between a Muslim who came to Palestine from outside Palestine and a Jew who came to Palestine from outside Palestine. In the Palestinian myth, any Muslim, any one, who self identifies as Palestinian is. If a Jew identifies as an Israel, that is not acceptable. Palestine as defined by Hamas and the PA is all of Jordan, Israel and the West bank and parts of Syria and Lebanon. But hey why let the facts get in your way. You have the internet.

Try to make one response without adopting that sarcastic, patronizing, know it all, missionary Bwana Sahib act. If you don' want to be on this forum get the phack off. Pull that bigoted tone with someone else. I am not your Sambo.

Yes there was a time Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain did not exist yet you only select out of all the countries that did not exist in the early 1900's, Israel. Your comment that Israel takes over more and more as it grows is of course false. It gave back the Sinai and left the Gaza which prove your comment false...but then that's not anything new. Next yes you are wrong. You misrepresent my positions, ignore the actual issues I challenge and make false statements contradicted by historic fact.

I did not question his actual opinion but the relevancy of his being Jewish and a Rabbiah. I stated: "Why is it necessary when discussing the Jerusalem issue to use this Rabbiah? Why? How is his Rabbiah relevant to the opinion? Does it make the opinion any more valid than if he was a Rabbiah expressing the exact opposite opinion? Is Kactus suggesting a Rabbiah is only valid and important when he expresses the same view as Kactus? Is Kactus suggesting any Jew or any Rabbiah with an opposite view of the above must be wrong because this guy is a Jew let alone a Rabbiah? Does his being a Rabiah automatically make his opinion more valid? Is it any more valid than if I placed a Mullah's or Catholic Priest's opinion on Jerusalem belong to Jews on this thread? " I also stated: "This person's being Jewish and Rabbiah is essential for Kactus-Hudson Jones because by pointing out they are a Jew and a Rabbiah, its supposed to immediately mean it is acceptable to be anti semitic. By using this individual as a mouthpiece with what is supposed to be the same opinion, that opinion is now no longer anti-Semitic. The fact is the above individual's opinion is not made any more or less valid by the fact he is Jewish or a Rabbiah anymore than it would be if he was a Christian or Muslim. The fact is the religion or clergy status of the individual will not determine the validity of their comment. The fact is there is no right or wrong subjective opinion, just a subjective opinion. Any opinion on Jerusalem's ownership is necessarily subjective and will have biases." Absolutely NOTHING in my words challenged the actual opinion of this Rabbiah being right or wrong. I could not have made it any more clear that the issue I was challenging was not his actual opinion but the use of his Jewish rabbinical status. You can misrepresent all you want Ghost but it fails. Your attempt to avoid the good Jew bad Jew tactic being used speaks loudly.

I didn't throw out what the Rabbiah stated. You again lie. Nothing in what I stated rejected that Rabbiah's opinion.

I would say you deliberately lie and misrepresent my repeated support of a two state solution. As for your posing as Nostradamus good for you. I don't doubt you have visions.

Why is it necessary when discussing the Jerusalem issue to use this Rabbiah? Why? How is his Rabbiah relevant to the opinion? Does it make the opinion any more valid than if he was a Rabbiah expressing the exact opposite opinion? Is Kactus suggesting a Rabbiah is only valid and important when he expresses the same view as Kactus? Is Kactus suggesting any Jew or any Rabbiah with an opposite view of the above must be wrong because this guy is a Jew let alone a Rabbiah? Does his being a Rabiah automatically make his opinion more valid? Is it any more valid than if I placed a Mullah's or Catholic Priest's opinion on Jerusalem belong to Jews on this thread? Bottom line, I call out Hudson Jones for repeatedly using the good Jew bad Jew tactic, and he comes back using the name Kactus and does it again. Its transparent, its blatant, and its been done so many times on this forum its a joke. Go bad and look for yourself the no. of times the name Kactus and Hudson Jones have been inter-posed in the same thread and responses to make it appear as if there is more than one person debating me. This person's being Jewish and Rabbiah is essential for Kactus-Hudson Jones because by pointing out they are a Jew and a Rabbiah, its supposed to immediately mean it is acceptable to be anti semitic. By using this individual as a mouthpiece with what is supposed to be the same opinion, that opinion is now no longer anti-Semitic. The fact is the above individual's opinion is not made any more or less valid by the fact he is Jewish or a Rabbiah anymore than it would be if he was a Christian or Muslim. The fact is the religion or clergy status of the individual will not determine the validity of their comment. The fact is there is no right or wrong subjective opinion, just a subjective opinion. Any opinion on Jerusalem's ownership is necessarily subjective and will have biases. What determines whether content stated is anti semitic or anti Muslim, etc., is its content and purpose. In this case the opinion stated is just that. The person's Jewish identity and Rabbinical stature however are deliberately used by Kactus-Hudson Jones. A good Jew is one who agrees with kactus-Hudson Jones, a bad one disagrees with them. You will note when I have challenged Hudson Jones on why its necessary to point out the religion or clergy status of the individual he refuses to comment but repeats the same tactic again. You will note when I challenge this tactic, Hudson Jones, Kactus, Omni, Ghost, whatever, they all remain silent as to the reason its being used. As I stated and what makes this attempt to use Jews on this thread as spokespersons fr Hudson Jones or Kactus is that I do not believe Israel should keep settlements on the West Bank. It doesn' make me a good Jew or a bad one. Of course not. Its just an opinion. No more valid or less valid than any other human being Jewish or not. However on this forum. the anti Israelis never fail to turn it into an attack about Jews and what Jews should think and not think. Its vile bigotry. I could come on this forum playing good Muslim bad Muslim and present a litany of Muslims who agree with me on all my views. It does not make them good or bad Muslims, it doesn't make their opinions any more valid than a non Muslim's. What Kactus-Hudson Jones et al want you to believe is that when a Jew agrees with them, that somehow cleanses them of what their actal agenda is on this board and what they have stated. Does anyone think the Rabbiah quoted believes Zionism is a cancer needing to be wiped out and Hamas is justified in engaging in terrorism against Israel? Ask yourself, have you ever read one word, one sentence from Kactus-Hudson Jones-Marcus-Ghost et al, that states, Israel has the right to exist as a JEWISH state free of terrorist attacks against it? Well? It will never happen. Their agenda is to deny the right of Israel to be a Jewish state and use tactics to denigrate the concept of a Jewish state or any Jew having the right to express his Jewishness as a political national collective identity. They can quote all the Jews they want including me, but the fact I agree with them that settlements on the West Bank are an impediment to peace, does not mean I am a good Jew or condone their actual agendas on this forum. I quote from this CHRISTIAN, Daniel Greenfield: not that his religion makes a difference or should make a difference: "Like most bullies, the liberal bigot is self-righteously angry at the thought of his victim daring to offer any kind of defense. The combination of ideology and bigotry work to reinforce a sense of rightness in playing the old game of "Beat the Jew". Being liberals, they do make a point of trotting out Jews to do at least some of the beating. This makes it look less like bigotry, and more like infighting. Of course this isn't exactly an original gimmick. The man who presided over the ethnic cleansing of the Jews from Spain in the 15th century was himself Jewish. In the early days of the USSR, the Communist Party employed the Yevsektsiya (the Jewish Section) to shut down synagogues, terrorized Jews and helped the NKVD murder Rabbis and Zionists. And even Pharaoh had his Jewish taskmasters and the Nazis their Kapos. As liberals themselves are so fond of pointing out when challenging the feminist bona fides of a Sarah Palin or the legitimacy of black conservatives, it is not genetics or biology, but the willingness to fight for the interests of a group that gives one claim to be a legitimate representative of that group. There is no conceivable argument for the likes of M.J. Rosenberg or Glenn Greenwald meeting such a test. Not now. Not ever. As I have written in the past, liberal anti-Zionism is actually poorly camouflaged anti-Semitism. It is based on the denial of Jewish national rights, which itself has roots in a Voltairesque disdain for the Bible and the Jews by association with it. The socialist approach has been that Jews ought to dissolve into the mass of humanity and cease to exist. Israel was based on a rejection of that approach. And that alone has won it an incredible amount of enmity. A continuing Jewish identity represents an implicit rejection of the secular messianism that has defined left wing movements since the French Revolution. The destruction of the Jews continues to be associated with the destruction of the old order. But where liberals once believed that removing the ghettos and legal barriers to civic participation would do the job for them, Israel has come to represent an obstacle to their agenda. While the Muslims wield the battering ram, their liberal advocates demand that Israel raise the gates to let them in. When the terrorists open fire, the left demands that Israel not shoot back. When Jews are murdered, the left shrugs. It has nothing to say about dead Jews. Only about the inconvenience of still having living ones around and cluttering up the place. While they are not prepared to make active war against Israel. they instead work to characterize any self-defense by Israel as illegitimate. Whatever Israel does, it is indicted for excessively defending itself. An excessive defense in their eyes being any defense at all." source: http://www.rapturenotes.com/liberal-bigots.html This article directly responds to the bigotry of Hudson Jones Kactus et al using the good Jew bad Jew tactic over and over on any thread dealing with Israel: https://futiledemocracy.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/stop-the-war-coalition-how-to-be-a-good-jew-2/

Organic? Lol.

What planet do you live on where you think these three quotes are the beginning and end of your reality as to the West Bank? Do you think you can pass off what is going on, on the West Bank as simply the above three references and your subjective inferences from the,? Is that it Citizen? Reality begins and ends with your subjective interpretations and inferences of these three articles? Can you get real. Living on the internet is not reality. You need to travel to the West Bank poser of expertise on it. You have no clue how many millions of so called Palestinins are on the West Bank. You need to find out how many of those so called Palestinians are not and moved there from other Arab countries in the last 60 years and squat on and they never owned and in fact took it away from other Palestinian Muslims so much so, Arafat to hide that reality blew up the land titles office on the West Bank to hide this fact. You need to look at the population growth of Palestinians on the West Bank and where they live and stop relying on the internet and articles you think tell you the beginning and end of a reality you have no clue on. The no. one issue on the West Bank are Muslims who moved there taking land from other Muslims. You have zero clue about that just as you ave zero clue 250,000 Ultra Orthodox Jews who live in he Hebron region were never Israeli and do not believe in an Israeli state and yet the PA and Hamas have stated they will kill them all if they do not leave the West Bank when its declared a state. That Palestinian state will also include Israel and Jordan not just the West Bank. Can you please go read the charters of the PA and Hamas. At least find out what their agenda is. Also if your entire knowledge of the West bank is based on three articles, let me make it clear as an be, you are being ridiculous. You are another arm chair expert who thinks the internet gives you omnipotence. Get real.

What part of this topic do you not understand. I note you and your anti Israel pissantes use this thread to avoid the actual topic of Jerusalem and use it to raise other political issues just as this pack and you can't debate the origins and history of Jerusalem on this thread but moved it to the other thread mixing it with the above issue to avoid discussing the actual historic origins of Israel. That makes you, Omni, Hudson Jones. Marcus, in my opinion very blatant and clear in how you avoid any topic you can't debate and switch the topic to avoid illustrating your complete and utter lack of understanding of the topic. Here's a hint, Jerusalem is the topic on this thread.

You seem to be unaware of what Jordan is and how it was created. You also assume Gaza was part of the Balfour declaration How about you stop posing and go read what the Balfour declaration said.

In regards to your first comment provide the words where I approve human rights violations by anyone-they do not exist. Provide the words. Next in the second sentence of your first comment, you made a comment about Harvey Weinstein yes men. It has nothing at all to do with the topic of the thread but shows how you make anti Jewish slurs and reveal you hate Jews and think if you throw in an insulting reference about a Jew, its relevant to the All it does is reveal you as a Jew hater and if Marcus or Ghost or Omni can not understand why your Harvey Weinstein comment is anti semitic good for all of you. It speaks loudly you condone it with your silence. I in regards to your second sentence I state it again based on your positions on this forum which are public record and anyone can find by putting in your name and reading back what you have written, your calling Zionism a cancer that needs to be wiped out and your words supporing the tacticst Hamas, the PA, Hezbollah, Iran use illustrate your support of a terrorist war to wipe out Israel as a Jewish nation. All anyone has to do is re-read your many posts to see the references you have made. In regards to your third sentence you lie again. I never said what you claimed. Provide the words. They do not exist. Its what you do. Lie. In regards to your fourth sentence you again use the tactic of good Jew v. bad that you have used continuously on this board. You try suggest that if a Jew agrees with you somehow they are more valid than a Jew that does not. The religion of the person stating their opinion is immaterial. The fact you try make it material is a blatant and classic example of you being an anti semite and playing the Jew card. Your argument is as irrelevant as the fact that there are Muslims who support the presence of Israel on the West Bank. By the way I do not support Israeli settlements on the West Bank as Ghost confirmed and I have stated many times. That doesn't make me a good or bad Jew but it most certainly makes you a bigot for trying to suggest it does Your good Jew bad Jew argument is a spent tactic. The fact a Jew might agree with you or not agree with you does not make his opinion any more or less valid. The fact you repeatedly try suggest it does speaks to your bigotry and anti Semitism. In regards to your last question I am calling you out as someone who from the get go has fabricated a false English name sounding personna to mask the fact that you are a Muslim extremist. Can I make that any clearer?

1. Please provide the words from me where I called Palestinians fake. I never stated this. You again fabricate words I did not state. 2.You might want to pass on your second comment to Hudson Jones who also lies and claims I give unconditional support to Israel. 3. In regards to your third comment you are not interested in what I have to say, you clearly indicated that by placing an insult, i.e., "what you have to rant about". This shows again you are a condescending individual with a patronizing attitude clearly showing contempt and rudeness for anyone you disagree with. 4. Finally Israel has as much right to call Jerusalem its capital as do a second Palestinian nation if it came to be or for that matter Christians.

That attempt to hide behind a false anti semite accusation to try make your comments legitimate is pale and transparent. Your words speak for themselves and they indicate you support terrorism and Muslim fundamentalist extremism and came on this board engaging in hateful comments. Period. Your playing the victim of being accused of anti Semitism is a joke. Its a tactic that is spent.

Your comment is illogical. It simply projects your own subjective personal bias that Israel as a Jewish nation does not matter. You have nothing to contribute to the thread other than spewing Israel is shit responses.

Ok hang on. Miley Cyrus granted is part of the illuminati and is a reptilian shape shifter bisexual slut but come on. She has a great voice when she sings classic songs. She really has a beautiful voice doing old classics. I also think she is a great comedic actress and will win an academy award one day. That said every generation feels the music coming up behind it is the devil's work, horsecrap, etc. Every generation pisses on the next one coming up. Music taste is subjective. Look personally I think Helen Reddy was Satan and I am convinced so is Wayne Newton, Celine Dionne, Anne Murray, Julie Andrews, Adele,. In my world Roy Orbison is the voice of God followed by Aretha Franklin, and a slew of gospel singers not to mention Billy Holiday. Me I go for jazz- blues, i.e., , Ry Cooder, Roy Buchanan, Clapton, Allman Brothers, BB King, Van Morrison, Miles Davis, Rev. Al Green, Marvin Gaye. I like that little brown guy Bruno Mars from Hawaii today who looks like a throw back to James Brown and Michael Jackson mixed in one. Great. As good as Prince another genuine brilliant star. I actually love Myley Cyrus singing classic country blues or KD Lang although she now looks like Wayne Newton. I think everyone should understand the Bee Gees were illuminati castrettos and Justin Bieber is a not so subtle lesbian taking advantage of Seline Gomez. Also Taylor Swift please. She is talentless. Beyoncé, Rihanna, Kate Perry, cannibal, shape shifting reptialian illuminati. All the rap singers, diaheria. Eminem a talentless schizophrenic. In regards to Opera, it can shatter ear drums but it and classical music are amazing when you learn it. Schubert, Mozart, Rachmananov, Ludwing B, Chopin, I love em. The late Gato Barbieri on the sax doing Last Tango in Paris, brilliant. You got to look for the gems. One time I was in Long Island and I walked by this simple old small church and man you should have heard the voices singing. There is no doubt if you have no idea what a God concept is, you hear some of those voices and you say, got it. Music is a God sound when done right. When done wrong yah its a Satanist illuminati attack clearly produced by Prince William the anti Christ.

I am of mixed opinion on the native inquiry of missing aboriginal women. On the one hand it may be crass political exploitation of this issue and do nothing in the long run. On the other hand for the people who have attended it, it clearly means something to them. That chance to speak out even if it may fall on deaf ears, has a therapeutic value. Maybe its an awful expensive one to provide, but symbolically having it expressed out loud might give some of these people an opportunity to heal or get some kind of closure. I think the cynic in me says its just another showboat Trudeau pandering exercise. On the other hand, the people who have taken the time to show up and speak are genuine and there pain is genuine and it has to mean something,

You stated and I quote: "All tribes celebrate their warriors. We do. The Israelis do." Stop denying the bullshit you stated. Israelis don't celebrate war and therefore their warriors. You have no clue about Israeli culture and what it in fact celebrates and what it shuns. Israel doesn't celebrate warriors. It celebrates the will to be free and overcome those who would deny Jews the right of existence. It does not hero worship its soldiers. You'd know that if you had lived or spoke to an Israeli. You never have-you assume. Israeli soldiers do not welcome attention or personality cults and they shun them. In fact Moishe Dayan and Ariel Sharon were openly criticized for their egos by all sides in a non political and distinctly military way. There is no bravado, macho code with an Israeli soldier. There's ho hero worship or celebration of warriors. Everyone in Israel is drafted and serves from 18 to 60. That's nothing to celebrate. Its a burden, a bloody burden no one in Israel wants but must carry.

Saudi Arabia is the caretaker of all Muslims and the holiest of its cities Mecca. This means it can do nothing ever to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state. From a practical perspective it may have interests that at times coincide with Israel's in regards to Iran but it finances extremist Sunni Muslims who detest Israel as much as they detest Iran. Saudi Arabia is no friend of Israel and never was. Its a your enemy is my enemy aquaintance.

Bullshit. You know nothing about the IDF or its soldiers or their culture. You spew crap. The IDF and the culture of the Israel armed forces does not celebrate war and never has. Go find out why before you spew out horsehit you make up.

And you think the Saudis are a credible party with no vested interest in what the outcome should be? Even the Saudis? Right. Also there is no internal US political move. Trump is sticking to a campaign pledge. As well his offer does not rule out a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem.