bud Posted October 15, 2012 Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 The Israelis occupy land as a result of war.It's not Arab land, it's land in dispute. sorry to inform you, but the occupied land is only "in dispute" in israel and your head. the rest of the world, including united states and canada agree with international law, that the land is occupied land which belongs to the palestinians and that israel is in violation of international law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 sorry to inform you, but the occupied land is only "in dispute" in israel and your head. the rest of the world, including united states and canada agree with international law, that the land is occupied land which belongs to the palestinians and that israel is in violation of international law. The rest of the world = Most Islamic nations, assorted fascists, useful idiots and Holocaust deniers, Alice Walker, Greta Berlin, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 15, 2012 Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 The rest of the world = Most Islamic nations, assorted fascists, useful idiots and Holocaust deniers, Alice Walker, Greta Berlin, etc. The UN even agrees that Israel has violated 'international law', but has no balls to hold anyone at all accountable for their actions for fears of being called anti-semetic or muslim haters. It's the perfect 'storm'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 The UN even agrees that Israel has violated 'international law', but has no balls to hold anyone at all accountable for their actions for fears of being called anti-semetic or muslim haters. It's the perfect 'storm'. The UN also appoints Robert Mugabe as a tourism ambassador. I think they're a tad past their 'best by date' due to the overt influence of the OIC. It directs the focus of the 'outrage over human rights abuses' by its very nature as a huge voting block. So yeah, let's piss on Israel while Syria kills more folks than all the Arab-Israeli wars combined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 15, 2012 Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 The UN also appoints Robert Mugabe as a tourism ambassador. I think they're a tad past their 'best by date' due to the overt influence of the OIC. It directs the focus of the 'outrage over human rights abuses' by its very nature as a huge voting block. So yeah, let's piss on Israel while Syria kills more folks than all the Arab-Israeli wars combined. Don't forget killing the Arab Spring by the Saudis (with US approval) in Bahrain so the US can continue to use it's ports for the 5th Fleet right across from Iran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 Don't forget killing the Arab Spring by the Saudis (with US approval) in Bahrain so the US can continue to use it's ports for the 5th Fleet right across from Iran. Is that your example of moral equivalency? That somehow the US is just as rotten as Syria? Then, I assume you'd have no problem moving there to raise a family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 Syria that is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 15, 2012 Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 Is that your example of moral equivalency? That somehow the US is just as rotten as Syria? Then, I assume you'd have no problem moving there to raise a family. No different that other people's moral equivalency. Bahrain wants freedom too. Why was that not allowed to happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 No different that other people's moral equivalency. Bahrain wants freedom too. Why was that not allowed to happen? Don't drag me into your Shia-Sunni squabbles. I have no pony in that race...perhaps you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peeves Posted October 15, 2012 Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 The rest of the world = Most Islamic nations, assorted fascists, useful idiots and Holocaust deniers, Alice Walker, Greta Berlin, etc. It's their group think on Jews and hate for Israeli and the USA or anything about them. They ignore the rest of the world and concentrate on the one small democracy in the Middle East. Dozens, including Muslim disputes, but that one sliver of land occupied by Jews is the cause célèbre for the selective attack group. Why not share ( I ask them) their displeasure now directed exclusively at a Jewish state of minor geographical proportions with some like the the Sahrawis, Of course being Black they are considered lesser peoples by Algerians. "Most frequently in English language usage, the term Sahrawi ("Saharaui") is usually used in reference to populations from the disputed Western Sahara territory, sometimes with a nationalist connotation. The Sahrawis are ethnically a mix of Arabs, Berbers and Black Africans. They inhabit the westernmost Sahara desert, in the area present-day Mauritania, southern Morocco, Western Sahara and extreme southwestern Algeria. As with most Saharan peoples, the tribes culture is mixed, showing Arab, Berber, and black African characteristics." Or perhaps the dozen or more of the others? See list . Of course they are Jews so it won't matter to most here. Still, Israel is on the list to please you if you're so inclined to solely fault Israelis. Disputed land(s) http://didyouknow.org/disputes/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted October 15, 2012 Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 (edited) The rest of the world = Most Islamic nations, assorted fascists, useful idiots and Holocaust deniers, Alice Walker, Greta Berlin, etc. sorry buddy. you're wrong. the rest of the world includes EVERYONE but the israel. everyone, meaning and including the u.s., canada and all the european countries. the occupation and the settlements are illegal as according to international law and EVERYONE but israel and the useful idiots disagree with that. Edited October 15, 2012 by bud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 sorry buddy. you're wrong. the rest of the world includes EVERYONE but the israel. everyone, meaning and including the u.s., canada and all the european countries. the occupation and the settlements are illegal as according to international law and EVERYONE but israel and the useful idiots disagree with that. How is South Viet-Nam these days, anyways? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted October 16, 2012 Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 How is South Viet-Nam these days, anyways? whoa. settle down straw man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted October 16, 2012 Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 The rest of the world = Most Islamic nations, assorted fascists, useful idiots and Holocaust deniers, Alice Walker, Greta Berlin, etc. No the rest of the world = Israel, Canada, the US, Brittain, Australia, etc etc etc. Not one of these countries or any other INCLUDING Israel, claim that the west bank is Israeli territory. And that includes the majority of Israeli jews themselves when polled. Thats a whole lot of usefull idiots and holocaust deniers The entire world besides you it would seem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 whoa. settle down straw man. South Viet-Nam...invaded and conquered by Communist forces in 1975. Eight years after the 6 Day War with its special do-over rules for when Arab invasions fail. No Greta Berlins for Saigon. So, perhaps you have a theory as to why one is an 'illegal occupation' and the other apparently isn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) No the rest of the world = Israel, Canada, the US, Brittain, Australia, etc etc etc. Not one of these countries or any other INCLUDING Israel, claim that the west bank is Israeli territory. And that includes the majority of Israeli jews themselves when polled. Well, if that's indeed true, Israel should be retreating to pre-1967 lines any second now. Thats a whole lot of usefull idiots and holocaust deniers The entire world besides you it would seem. This thread is about a certain Holocaust denier in particular: Greta Berlin. Founder of the Free Gaza Movement. The same group as Naomi Klein and other high profile Hamas supporters are members. The person you're apparently defending. Edited October 16, 2012 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted October 16, 2012 Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) South Viet-Nam...invaded and conquered by Communist forces in 1975. Eight years after the 6 Day War with its special do-over rules for when Arab invasions fail. No Greta Berlins for Saigon. So, perhaps you have a theory as to why one is an 'illegal occupation' and the other apparently isn't? you have a habit of pulling things out of your .. and then trying to draw a parallel between it and israel's illegal actions to somehow try to justify israel's actions.. look up UN resolution 413. now back to the topic of the whole world finding israel's occupation and settlements and the annexation of east jerusalem illegal. Edited October 16, 2012 by bud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted October 16, 2012 Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) sorry to end this typical witch hunt and howling of anti-semitism, but here is greta berlin's statement: I am not a Holocaust denier. And I am not a supporter of the video that I posted, nor would I ever have been. It was, in fact, an example of propaganda that is EXACTLY what I and others are horrified over. The video (although I didn't watch it then) seemed like the kind propaganda that our group was discussing. And I passed it on because of the title. Ironically I am caught in the same propaganda hysteria that I was trying to fight. It was my mistake that I didn't post to the small private group on Facebook and the video ended up on my wall. Greta here is a comment by someone who originally came down on greta berlin and her comment: I wrote this morning about a controversial tweet sent by the co-founder of the Free Gaza Movement, Greta Berlin. I learned later that a writer who I’ve long respected, Larry Derfner, has written in defense of Berlin, calling attacks on her “slander,” and when Derfner writes something, I listen. The heart of his defense was that: All these stories referred to Berlin’s apology on the Free Gaza Movement website—but only to one part of it: the part where she explains that she didn’t mean for the tweet to go out on the Free Gaza Movement’s Tweeter [sic] account, but only to a group of people on her personal Facebook page. Reporting this and only this as her “apology” naturally made Berlin look even more evil. …Berlin’s full explanation… is that her tweet was not a statement of her views, but a headline for the video she was sending to a discussion group on “propaganda and racism” as an “example of the terrible propaganda that could be spewed on websites.” I was careful in writing my piece to speak up for those who are falsely accused of being anti-Semitic simply because they support Palestinian rights—I am among those people, as are many beloved friends. The point of my post was that in spite of what I see as a troubling over-use of the anti-Semitism accusation, real, honest-to-god Jew hatred does still exist, and pro-Palestinian activists who employ it not only hurt the Jews against which it is directed, but also the cause they claim to defend: Palestinian rights, and a just resolution of the conflict. Edited October 16, 2012 by bud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 you have a habit of pulling things out of your .. and then trying to draw a parallel between it and israel's illegal actions to somehow try to justify israel's actions.. look up UN resolution 413. now back to the topic of the whole world finding israel's occupation and settlements and the annexation of east jerusalem illegal. lol...UN Resolutions are the issue. You're also not "the whole world', even though you think you speak for "the whole world". South Viet-Nam used to exist until an aggressor invaded and took over by force well after the so-called precedent of the 1967 Six Day War re: international law and the results of war. Yet, there are no UN Resolutions telling what was North Viet-Nam to had over the 'illegally occupied land'. Try as you might, you won't wiggle out of the fact that there's one 'international law' for Israel and another 'international law' for everybody else. UN 413, which rewards North Viet-Nam's aggression by admitting it to the UN as the new reality on the ground, proves this to be true. This was despite the massive refugee problem (Boat People) and the torture & slaughter in the 're-education camps' that occurred post war. So, like the Mufti turned SS man, the fate of East Prussia and the end of the Viet-Nam War, you'll just have to continue to ignore the more uncomfortable aspects of your cause's zealotry...ironic word, that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraychik Posted October 16, 2012 Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 DogOnPorch must be pretty desperate for conversation, he's going back and forth with an anti-Semite and another guy who isn't sure if the Muslim Brotherhood is Islamist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraychik Posted October 16, 2012 Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 Jordan only gave-up claim to the so-called West Bank in 1988. Land they, themselves, captured during war. If there's a place that is disputed on this planet, it's this chunk of land. It should have been annexed by Israel decades ago and residents given a choice of staying or going. Staying = becoming Israeli. But, alas... Incorporating the Arabs of the so-called West Bank would've been suicide for Israel. They should have been forced to Jordan; a form of repatriation to the state created for them from the former British Mandate for Palestine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraychik Posted October 16, 2012 Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 Not really. The cause arose at the same time as most other Arab nationalist movements. Centered around the large ego of its founder and his desire to viewed as the general leader of the Pan-Arab movement over a Hashemite or a Saud (et al). It was, after all, al-Husseini who restored the Temple Mount to what we see today with the gold dome and elaborate art. Since when? "Palestinianism" was almost exclusively a product of the Six Day War. Prior to that, they were just Arabs (tribal). They magically morphed into a new nationalism, which has been very effective as a tool of propaganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraychik Posted October 16, 2012 Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 Arguably the most extremist of statist views around. So now statism is another term we can add to the growing list of terms you don't understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 Since when? "Palestinianism" was almost exclusively a product of the Six Day War. Prior to that, they were just Arabs (tribal). They magically morphed into a new nationalism, which has been very effective as a tool of propaganda. Arafat (an al-Husseini) was the Mufti's nephew and merely picked-up the torch around 1964 when the Mufti 'retired'. Haj Amin viewed his clan as the keepers of al-Aqsa and pushed the '3rd most holy place in Islam' biz on the rest of the 'Islamic world'. A concept which had been snoozing since the days of Omar in the 7th century. His hatred of Jews was only matched by his hate for the Hashemites in Jordan who not only wanted peace with the new Jewish state but also scoffed at the Mufti's egotistical aspirations of greatness. The Mufti eventually got a hit out on Abdullah I in 1951...assassinating him as he visited the Mufti's mosque in Jerusalem. Even when under Arafat, the Palestinian Arab-Jordanian relationship was volatile, exploding into Black September in 1970. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 16, 2012 DogOnPorch must be pretty desperate for conversation, he's going back and forth with an anti-Semite and another guy who isn't sure if the Muslim Brotherhood is Islamist. I think it's important to show the buds of this planet their hypocrisy. The Viet-Nam War is just a prime example how the rules shift depending upon the presence of Jews. UN 413 was one of those rubber-stamp resolutions that acknowledged that the Communist victory was complete and nobody was going to try and make them give back their spoils of war...a war the Communists started. Rewarding their aggression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.