Guest TrueMetis Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 An ancient blood libel. Most aren't even aware on a conscience level. A Mexican didn't rat out on the Lord. How can you rat out on a guy who didn't exsist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 How can you rat out on a guy who didn't exsist? So true but some feel it was a sin worth hating real or percieved people over.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TrueMetis Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 So true but some feel it was a sin worth hating real or percieved people over.. Oh religous idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Oh religous idiots. Certainly but there are so so so many morons that just jump on the bandwagon even though they believe nothing and just need a scapegoat for their hatred. That would be the left who cannot hate blacks, slavs, asians, aborigionals, arabs and such but need some group to focus blame on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Yes, being a Jew is a terrible crime. Can't have those sort of people buying land off you even if you did sell it and then inviting their families even when threatened with extermination. Wondering why it isn't the same with Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and Slavs with the left. Only Jews. Responding to my attempt to eliminate pure hyperbole with more hyperbole is not going to get you anywhere. There is a world of difference between not knowing why someone does something and knowing they have a really bad reason for it. Your whole argument is skewed. Do you really think things west of the Jordan River would of been all cheery if it had been a bunch of Tibetans who decided to make it their new home with UN approval? Certainly there is a lot of anti-Semitism going around, but to pretend that it is only anti-Semitism is just stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Responding to my attempt to eliminate pure hyperbole with more hyperbole is not going to get you anywhere.There is a world of difference between not knowing why someone does something and knowing they have a really bad reason for it. Your whole argument is skewed. Do you really think things west of the Jordan River would of been all cheery if it had been a bunch of Tibetans who decided to make it their new home with UN approval? Certainly there is a lot of anti-Semitism going around, but to pretend that it is only anti-Semitism is just stupid. Many Arab states use "Tibetan" labor no-problemo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Oh religous idiots. (He thinks I'm religious!!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Responding to my attempt to eliminate pure hyperbole with more hyperbole is not going to get you anywhere.There is a world of difference between not knowing why someone does something and knowing they have a really bad reason for it. Your whole argument is skewed. Do you really think things west of the Jordan River would of been all cheery if it had been a bunch of Tibetans who decided to make it their new home with UN approval? Certainly there is a lot of anti-Semitism going around, but to pretend that it is only anti-Semitism is just stupid. It was 20% Jewish at the time of the British mandate hence you argument is bullshit. Jews began buying land off the Palestinian people who were happy to sell. Post WWII when Jews immigrated en masse was when the major problems came. Hence, an idiot argument of Tibetans being suddenly 'beamed' in is out to lunch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 (edited) It was 20% Jewish at the time of the British mandate hence you argument is bullshit. Jews began buying land off the Palestinian people who were happy to sell. Post WWII when Jews immigrated en masse was when the major problems came. Hence, an idiot argument of Tibetans being suddenly 'beamed' in is out to lunch. The Grand Mufti had his own version of the Zionist movement going on. What he really wanted is a state for his big powerful clan/family (al-Husseini). He also believed himself a direct descendant of Mohammed...so you see what we're dealing with here. (cough cough ego cough) Edited July 24, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 It was 20% Jewish at the time of the British mandate hence you argument is bullshit. Jews began buying land off the Palestinian people who were happy to sell. Post WWII when Jews immigrated en masse was when the major problems came. Hence, an idiot argument of Tibetans being suddenly 'beamed' in is out to lunch. So, you are saying that the problem was not that they were Jewish but that after World War II there were lots more of them? And that counters my argument, " It is not just because they just hate Jews, " ummmmm... how? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 So, you are saying that the problem was not that they were Jewish but that after World War II there were lots more of them? And that counters my argument, " It is not just because they just hate Jews, " ummmmm... how? The rise of modern problems between Jews and Arabs began with the Grand Mufti coming to power in 1919. He viewed himself as the keeper of one of Islam's holiest spots and Zionists were definately a fly in the butter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Obama was in Ghana. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 So, you are saying that the problem was not that they were Jewish but that after World War II there were lots more of them? And that counters my argument, " It is not just because they just hate Jews, " ummmmm... how? You said Do you really think things west of the Jordan River would of been all cheery if it had been a bunch of Tibetans who decided to make it their new home with UN approval? However, Jews were already established in that area and had been for generations which makes any attempt to use another peoples as an example invalid. As well, while Jews were established, they were not viewed as full humans by Arabs hence, when they began to immigrate, they became a perceived threat to them. The antisemitism goes back centuries however, this would have been the first time it was actually remotely valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 (edited) However, Jews were already established in that area and had been for generations which makes any attempt to use another peoples as an example invalid. As well, while Jews were established, they were not viewed as full humans by Arabs hence, when they began to immigrate, they became a perceived threat to them. The antisemitism goes back centuries however, this would have been the first time it was actually remotely valid. Reducing the rest of the world to Jews and Arabs is narrow. Edited July 25, 2009 by benny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Reducing the rest of the world to Jews and Arabs is narrow. It certainly would be which is why I specified 'in that area' so bloody morons would know what place me, Remiel, DOP and others were talking about, even though only a fool would not know this as the entire drift of the discussion is pretty much about that area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 It certainly would be which is why I specified 'in that area' so bloody morons would know what place me, Remiel, DOP and others were talking about, even though only a fool would not know this as the entire drift of the discussion is pretty much about that area. To respect the subject matter of this topic, this electronic board should be our main area of concern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 To respect the subject matter of this topic, this electronic board should be our main area of concern. Obama was in Ghana. Physician, heal thyself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 26, 2009 Report Share Posted July 26, 2009 Here yet another example on how to widen this board: Joseph Biden's undiplomatic remarks on Russia while visiting Georgia and Ukraine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.