Israeli right winger endorses one state solution!

Discussion in 'World Events' started by S.A.M., Jun 2, 2010.

  1. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    it would take some finagling but the return of ownership of land back to those it was stolen from doesn't preclude the decendents of thieves having to leave. considering a decent portion of the stolen palestinian land has housing on it makes it very easy to return the palestinian to his land with minimal displacement of the people there. though it will require some people to be moved because of housing contraints and with farm land still being used as farm land.
    pretty much the get moved to a different part of palestine.

    something you need to get through your your itty bitty mind is that simply because they got away with theft and preventing the palestinians from returning doesn't mean they should continue too. in other words that they managed to not give it back like they were legally required to for 60 years is not an argument that they shouldn't have too.

    in they eyes of the law they are irrelevant and know that doesn't make it a bad law the problem is not with the law and not with the palestinians the problem is with Israel and the Israelis who broke this law. yes it sucks but the longer you try to not be accountable the pricer it is when you do.

    really you need to come up with something less stupid, less bigoted, and less unabashedly pro-Israel than well they got away with long enough to breed so we should just forget about it. their victims are just being whiny and selfish I mean I just kicked him out of his house and lived there why should I have to give it back. in other words NO DECENT HUMAN BEING WOULD MAKE THE ARGUMENT YOUR MAKING
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Oh like in the USA or Australia?

    yeah and let the Jews be oppressed by the Palestinian Muslims, all you have done is move the oppression from the Palestinians to the Jews, you did not get rid of it.

    They won it fair and square, the Palestinians lost it, blame the Arabs.

    hey the Israelis did not cause the problem when the state was legally partitioned, the Arabs did when they attacked, they striped the Palestinians of a state, they forbid true citizenship rights to the Palestinians refugees to this day and oppress Palestinians and even massacre them on occasion, they need to be held accountable, accept the Palestinians as true citizens and been done with the whole issue of Palestinian refugees.

    All this wonderful slander from you, I have been very open about leaving gaza alone, incorporating the west bank full citizens or removing the settlers and leaving it alone, even open to the Israeli paying reparations, but I'll put my foot down in requiring Israelis to give it all up, that Israelis deserve the right to self determination as much as anyone else, and I advocate options which grant both Israelis and Palestinians such options, if you want to call that bigoted so be it.

    Oh but its far more complicated then that, this is about a house which was legally divided by the landlord before he left, where one side did not like that and so with all his relatives/neighbors tried to murder the other side, the other side won and took most of the house. Shit the other side should have call the police had them all taken to jail, oh wait this is not about a house its about nations and the law is completely different! When this happens between nations the winning nation takes the land, end of story.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    "Itty bitty mind"?
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    please stop it with the anachrnistic comparisans. using events that happened before the laws came into effect isn't going to make your case.

    you keep saying that ad nausem but never prove it.

    First off they didn't win it it fair and square. secondly Why should the arabs be blamed for the actions of ISrael thirdly its irrelevant.

    it wasn't legally partianed though
    to prevent them selves from being invaded and having to deal with refugees because ISrael wne ton a bender of conquests
    stripped? yes we keep on hearing but the lieks of you anti muslim fanatics that it was the arabs fault even though israel gained 75% of that land in its war of conquest
    which would have never happened had the law been followed and they returned to their lands.
    same dishonest illogical arguments. first off while not good they are still treated a far cry better than in ISrael and secondly how the arabs treat them is irrelevant to their legal right to return.
    yeah when allied with ISrael
    So they need to be held accountablke but the people responsible for their plight ISrael and the ISraelis don't?
    No the palestinians need to be given their legal right to choose between going back to their property or getting just compensation and resettling. You need to STFU and understand you don;t have the right to make that choice for them. None of us do.

    says the dicks that's got away with libel. and not slander cause its true. also the ajectives were not describing you but your argument
    so it can starve to death.
    that's not for you to decide it for the palestinians to.
    that's nice but again your silly bigoted wants are irrelevant the law says the palestinians must be given the choice to return.
    the ISraeli have no right to self determination in palestine unless the palestinian do and guess what a jew only state is not what they want so to fucking bad. I'm sorry you don't understand the concept of self determination but what you want is to say that the taking of that right from the palestinians to give the jews of world is ok and that's not right and good.
    except you advocate the ISraeli keeping everything they have stolen and the palestinians getting the scraps. you don't want them to have equal right you want continued jewish rule. Wanting equal right isn't bigoted. but ignoring the law and demanding rights be stripped from people so your favoured people can continue with their priviles based on criminal acticities is bigoted.

    it wasn't legally divided. Do you say anything that isn't ISraeli propaganda?
    libel against the palestinians. they had a problem with it so tyhey made an effort to protect their right to self determination against the JEWISH effort to take it all. You filthy bullshit belief is showed for the lie it by the fact it was the Israeli who stockpiled weapons and not the palestinians.
    true the aggresors won sadly.
    And as usual you let your fucking wants interfere with reality. the treaties that ended the franco-prussian war, ww1, and ww2 all put forth that land gains made in war are against international law. and even if You lie was true it still doesn't negate the right for the owners to return to it.

    also for someone who keeps saying the law of nations is different than the law of indivduals you rely heavy on an idea that's basicily statutory limitations something crimes of nations don't have.
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2010
  8. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    trying not to curse had to get creative.
  9. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    How about this solution, Palestinians can move to Israel, but Israel will be able to limit the number to a certain percent (less than 50) of the total population, in order to maintain Jewish self-determination. Also, Palestine will be a separate state and have a similar arrangement, where Jewish settlers can stay there, but will be under majority Palestinian rule. The result would be like a yin-yang symbol. Demographic changes can be handled by either incentivizing immigration one way or the other, or alternatively by leaving people where they are and changing their citizenship so they can only participate in the political process in one country or the other.
  10. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    while I do agree with the slow move of population I can't accept that that they can't outnumber the jewish population. The whole jewish privilage must be completely removed. IT also paternalistic toward the palestinians slightly implying that with out jewish masters they can't run a state. I can't agree with the whole jewish self determination. part. they shouldn't have ever been allowed to take palestine from the palestinians to create a jewish only or jewish privilaged state
    IT be better just to combine the 2.

    Like going back while I think all palestinians should be able to return and gain their property back I believe it shouldn't happen all at once say 20% of the palestinian refugee population a decade.
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2010
  11. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Would you be satisfied if Israel paid all of the Palestinians to move to Montana and gave them a monthly stipend for 20 years? That is...assuming everyone else was fine with it.
  12. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    nope because that would be denying the palestinians their legal right to choose to return or accept compensation and settle else where. also I don't think the monies for paying out the compensation should come solely from Israel.
  13. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Well...they should take the same deal Israel made. Jews were basically paid to leave Europe and move to Israel whether they wanted to or not (see those who tried to return to Poland). If they didn't, they'd be heavily oppressed. Palestine isn't even oppressed so them taking the deal would be a huge win.
  14. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    get international support for arming you and not you opponents and than attacking thems? because that the deal Israel made.
    No they choose to leave europe.
    You really want to bring up the one country that had legiatmate reasons to ahte the jewish people. maybe if you wanted to go back to poland you shouldn't have tried the soviets to put bullets in them.
    They wouldn't have been oppressed I mean they would get to live in a world were jews could kill and ignore the law willy nilly and life would have been difficult
    are you delusional palestine isn't oppressed. being killed for trying to defend them selves, having their land taken from them the moment a jew wants it, and being denied basic human rights isn't oppressed? god your a delusional bigot. The palestinians aren't being oppressed the same way the nazis didn't commit genocide.
  15. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    But it would be only in Israel, so they can enjoy a democracy while ensuring their culture survives. The Palestinians would enjoy the same privilege in their nation.

    This would have to be acceptable to both parties, not just one. If you like, you can see it as the first step towards normalizing relations and opening borders.

    They would run their own state. But a Jewish presence in Palestine would ensure cross-cultural interaction, maybe intermarriage.
  16. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    the problem being its condoning and rewarding the crimes that Israel has commited while punishing the vicitms of those crimes. they could still ensure their culture survives in a palestinian majority state. It wouldn't take to much longer than it did to create this mess for the palestinain attitudes to shift back to what they were in 48. secular and pro western.
    it not about having the privilage its still about being denied the reight to get back what theirs if they choose.

    as an end point I cannot agree with it as a stepping stone to a state that has multiple ethnicities living in relative harmony(perfect harmony will never happen. we consider the states good but in some cities like chicago and new york you can get knifed for being the wrong ethnicity) that I can whole hardly agree with
  17. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Let me get this straight, your morality ends with before the UN? Well then certainly you would accept the UN partitioning, or is that also conveniently ignorable for some reason?

    Never a prove it?
    They were killing each other even before the partitioning, I cited polls and events like the Ramallah Lynching as proof of the obscene hate the Palestinians have, and its all in through one ear and out the other with you!

    The Arabs attacked Israel (1948 war) not the other way around.


    Yeah I guess I'm not piss off about a movie that put Arabs/Indians people that are assumed to be Muslim as the evil villains and perpetuating the evil Muslim stereotype.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    But you know I don't complain to the mods about your name calling, I honestly don't care, it just makes you look childish to me that all.

    Yep, the arabs fault, if they did not attack Israel conquest would not have been legitimate.

    The primary cause of the Palestinian plight is the Arabs, if the surround arab stated did not attack after the partitioning and did not rule and oppress the Palestinians, Palestine would have been a viable country by now, hell they may have even merge with Israel and became one by now. But the surround Arab state had to try to take it all for them selves.

    I'm all for giving them compensation and resettling them somewhere else, like on all that land the Arabs took from the Jews when they kicked them out post Israel. But putting them back in Israel now will only cause more problems. Your obsession with your version of justice will never bring peace, never bring freedom and happiness to both the Palestinians and Israelis. I'm merely proposing, nations though do often have the rights to dictate for people.

    So saying "likes of you anti-muslim fanatics" isn't a personal attack?

    And how would that happen? Heck they aren't even staving to death at present, they have one of the highest fertility rates in the world, with on average 5 children per women, population growth isn't "starving to death".

    No its not for me to decides, it for nations to decide.

    Well they can return to Gaza and the west bank, once we get those to become viable countries that is.

    Like how the Europeans have no right to self-determination in America and Australian, oh that right you don't think that was wrong because law did not exist then against it, well the laws for when Israel formed then had partitioned it legally, the Arabs screwed that up, not Israels fault, certainly not the Jews fault.

    No what I'm saying its it fair to give both countries where they can both have self-determination, not one over the other, not one stateless and not the other. And no not the "Jews of the world" either, Israel is not the Jews of the world.

    No I've advocated Palestinians get back all the west bank, include control of the fresh water, its not the "scraps" if the Palestinians will be controlling the majority water reserves fro the region, the most precious resource in that area.

    Of Israel, not of gaze or the west bank, heck not even continue Jewish rule in the long term, I find assimilation of the west bank as full citizens as very acceptable idea, Jews would only have 58-62% of the population then, and would likely become a minority within 2-3 decades. I hope the gradual merging might reduce the hate and fanaticism enough to allow for a stable secular country of people that can at least tolerate each other.

    That not what I stated or believe, just personal assumptions and insults from you.

    it was a UN mandate, it was voted upon and accepted. Its a matte of historical fact, Israeli propaganda or not.

    What stockpiling weapons have to do with anything? Next you will be saying it was Israelis that got 5 Arab nations to attack

    Yeah and these treaties pertain to Israel? If they do show it.

    Never said it I did, Israel was legit from day 1.
  18. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    No just what is legally possible.
    How can you accept a UN resoultion that is a violation of the UN charter

    Yes you have shown that while all the reson ignoring why. they fought because of zionism a venture designed to steal from them and take away their rights. you have never proved that if they get what they are fighting for they would still be violent.

    They attacked only after Israel began trying to expand and conquer everything. they did so out of defensive reasons not offensive reasons. had Israel not invaded the rest of palestine they wouldn't have gotten involved.

    yeah just ignore what you don't like.

    Well you think muslims shouldn't be allowed to build at ground zero because of a few people's hate and you want the palestinians stripped of their legal rights something you have not demanded for all other refugees
    Yes well calling your actions be descrided faithfully make you look like a child to me.

    So its the arabs fault that Israel started trying to ethnically cleanse palestine before they got involved. and how does trying to stop something make ther action your trying to stop ok?

    and you wonder why I call you out as an Israel supporter. Israel took 75% of the addition land meaning than had around 80% palestine, THEY were the ones who expelled the palestinians, they were the ones who prevented them from returning bit its not their fault. its the arabs fault for not wanting to suffer the cost Israel tried to inflict on them by denying them their rights.

    Which denies both the jewish and palestinians their legal rights
    only for those who wish jews do have more rights than palestinians in palestine. for the people who want equal rights their are next to no problems at all..
    First off its not my version of justice its following the law something that seems alien to you. probably because you refuse to try and understand it. IT will bring peace,freedcom, and happiness to both. The problem for you is it doesn't punish the palestinians enough for the crimes that zionists did against them.
    first off nations are people. and secondly no they don't at leaqst not in the way you think they do.

    no its a desription of the fact for any argument involving muslims and non-muslims you have always advocated for discrination or the denial of rights for the muslims. IF you show one time where you did not do so in the context of muslim and non muslim interactions I will personally ask for a 3 day ban.

    lets crap land. and under your proposal Israel get to keep the land they taken so they lose the best of it. and no strong way to build up an economy to get more production of food stuffs.

    its not for the nations to decide. Israel doesn't get a say the US doesn't get a say. No nation outside of the palestinian one gets to. THE PALESTINIANS get to decide. and don't act as if you don't think you have the right to decide when you make demands that require them not getting to decide.

    so they can return to their cramped ghettos wow that's so gracious of you. or we could do what I want have have the law followed and they can return to their properties if they choose to do so.

    quite strawmaning and libeling me. and quit playing a fucking moron. I have explained this to many times but fuck I will do it again. I don't think its moral but because their is no law(the whole self determination comment here is idiotic considering the whole concept of the self determination of nations hadn't happened yet.) their is no legal recouse.
    That a lie. the law said at that time that state could only beformed via self determination which is the people of a territory choosing their own politcal status.
    wrong wrong wrong. the arabs didn't screw up the fought for their rights. Its definitely Israel and the jewish people fault because they were the ones who advocated and did remove the palestinians.

    except the Israeli have zero claim to self determination in palestine(well except the pre-zionist ones).
    basically your saying its ok to limit one people's right so another people can share it?
    first off Israel disagrees with you. secondly Israel is the illegal(in this case actually having nothing to do with the violation of the UN charter and their wars of conquest. illegal because it flies in the face of the definition of self deterimination) expression of "self dertermination" of the jews of the world.

    Right which why you said you didn't have a problem with the ISraeli proposal of them getting everything they have and stripping the palestinian state of most of the basic rights of states. and why is it if its the far less amount that arabs took its ok for them to get it back but if its the vastly greater part that jews took they can't. That is plain discrimination on your part.

    So you think ignoring the main source of palestyinian anger is going to create peace. yes their made that their rights were taken from them so your solution is a paternalistic stripping of more rights yeah that's so going to work.

    know its an accurate description of your beliefs. the assumption,insults , and libel go from you to me. where the insult or the assumption. you believe the jewish people have more rights they get to defend themselves and control their airspace the pals don't. they get to keep stolen property the arabs don't get their stolen property back more rights. you wish to strip the palestinians of their right to choose to return to their property or get compensated everything I said was true.

    First off it was a british manadate. and the vote is irrelevant. The un charter say states must be formed via self determination. ITs Israeli propaganda that the UN vote is relevant.

    it show intent to attack
    they did. had ISrael not gone out side of the area of the illegal partitian no arab army would have gotten involved.

    they don't. they hit Israel because of the concept of custumary law in which when a law is becomes widely followed and accepted it applies to all states even those that don't sign it. and secondly the tenth treaty of Versailles and the peace treaty made at Potsdam that lead to the creation of the UN both were designed to be treated as custumary law.

    First off even if that were true it still wouldn't change the fact it has to be held accountable for its crimes which you argue a limitation on that the law doesn't recognize. secondly no Israel was never legit because it had nothing to do with self determination. But than again given you general view that arabs must pay for jewish/Israeli crimes it doesn't surprise me you'd say that.
  19. nirakar ( i ^ i ) Registered Senior Member

    For the most part the concept of winning land fair and square through war has not been considered illegitimate since Hitler. Same for "might is right". The world may still operate that way but they try to at least create the appearance of legality and moral legitimacy.

    It was recognized that changing borders through war is problematic.

    Zionism created the problem in Palestine. Antisemitism in Europe may have created the Zionism. When you want somebody else's land you may create problems.

    "Neither shall you covet your neighbor’s wife. Neither shall you desire your neighbor’s house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor." Zionism violated the ten commandments.

    I discovered that the myth that I grew up with that Israel started no wars was wrong. I the Israel defenders got one over on me and had me believing a lie.

    1956 and 1967 are not what I was taught that they were.

    1948 is far more complex than the standard pro Israel narrative taught in the USA. You can't say what the Israeli side would have done had they not been attacked but there is plenty of evidence that the Israeli side was out to take land beyond that which that the UN was giving to it and was not just trying to defend itself. Whether the King of Jordan was Israel's ally or enemy in 1948 is unresolved.

    The partition was the will of the great powers and therefore had whatever legal authority comes from the UN. Moral legitimacy is something that the UN can align itself with but is not something that the UN can create.

    Religious ideas ideologies like communism and racism and social Darwinism and true or false historical narratives can and have all been used to create the appearance of moral legitimacy for conquests of people and land. That kind of moral legitimacy is just bullshit self deception and has no value and is not what I mean by moral legitimacy.

    There are certain standards like the prohibition and killing, murdering and raping that have been adopted by humans all over the word and by religions and legal institutions all over the world. These ancient universal standards are what I mean by moral legitimacy. Basically is the behavior what an informed kind or just person would support? Justice may be to create an efficiency within a society by allowing reducing the energy wasted on stealing and defense from stealing and by wasting energy on revenge. Revenge may be the instinct at the foundation of justice. Kindness may be the instinct at the foundation of family and community.

    What the UN did in the Partition of Palestine did not adhere to the "no stealing legal norm" and therefore was not just or kind and therefore had no moral legitimacy. The Palestinians were 70% of the people and owned or were the traditional users 90% of the land so to give control of half of that land to a people determined to create a Jewish state was an injustice.

    Jews certainly deserved safety and compensation for the crimes committed against them but this safety and compensation could not come at the expense of the Palestinians if it was to be morally legitimate. The Palestinians owed no debt to the Jews.

    The Palestinians did not kill or forcibly convert Israels ancient Jewish population to Islam; the Palestinians are the converted descendants of Israel's ancient Jewish population.
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2010
  20. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    No what is legally possible is that the Palestinians can't return to Israel but can be granted a state of their own. Its arguable if it violates the UN charter or not, clearly the UN felt they had the right and principle was made in good faith.

    Kind hard to prove a hypothetical, the fact they were killing each other before hand, the fact the Palestinians tear Israelis asunder and dance in their blood is all we got to project on. At it core though the Israelis deserve the right to live under their own management instead of under others who were at least historically hostile to them. I'm all for a one state solution eventually once we can prove they can live with each other.

    No Israel accepted the partition outright, then the Arabs attacked.

    First of all the other states were not "Palestine" (unless your accepting that arab state are the same people!) and they attacked because they wanted to rule over all of Palestine and Israel, the proof is in the fact they did rule over gaza and the west bank from the 1948 war to the 1967.

    No, I don't have a clue what you were saying, you need to fix the grammar of something, because I can't understand that paragraph.

    What? when did I ever say they shouldn't be allow to build at ground zero? Fuck I never even posted on that thread!

    I just don't want to strip the Israelis of their rights to be free and live, its would be a negative net gain in overall happiness, no utility in that.

    eeh, I don't care.

    Clearly your prescribe to an alternate history, the Arabs were not protecting the Palestinians, they were protecting their own self interests, that why they ruled over what remained of Palestine for 20 years and put the Palestinians in camps. If the Arabs had cared about the Palestinians they would have integrated them in the surround arab nations fully.

    And they took this after they won the war. It does not matter the I advocate a gradual one state solution or viable 2 state solutions, as long as I'm not with you fully on oppressing the "stealing" Jews, I'm an Israeli supporter.

    The Israelis had rights too, why can't you see that, the arabs states tried to snuff them out, and when they couldn't they kicked out almost all of their jews, took the land for them selves bout ohh could'nt give that land they stole from the Jews to the Palestinians, that land was 3 times the total area of Israel!

    In the present state of things no, no it won't, to achieve a one state solution with these people we first need to reduce their hate, a gradual and painstaking process, I'm all for it once we can get them to live together peacefully and secularly.

    Nations are entires that are more then the sum of their parts, people are people.

    Why do you lie like that? Is this like a reverse psychology ploy to get me to advocate for that horrible movie?

    Gee Aside for a thread I'm actively running about how Hollywood is shiting out another movie were whites are the protagoniest, Arabs/Indians are the the antiagonist (people who are assumed Muslim by Americas ignorant) I have advocated for muslims on many occasions for example Against targeting Muslims in airport security:

    Its not my proposal, its the existing scenario, the west bank and gaza, mind you the west bank controls the majority of Israel and Palestinians water, giving palestinians power over the water would provided a strong way for building up an economy, heck it works for Lesotho.

    No they don't get to decide, factual reality, here a test: can a Palestinian walk in to Israel right now and get their property back, demand is right to return and get it acknowledged?

    I said "viable countries" not ghetto/camps. Having them return would require kicking out a whole bunch of people who live there, require putting another people under occupation, that brings no net benefit only more suffering.

    And I keep repeating the facts: The israelis choose there political status as you say, ergo they had the right to form a state. The Arab nations attack, not israel. Jewish peoples fault?, All Jews of the world were for Israel?

    All peoples have a right to self determination, to form their own nation, does not matter where they are or where they came from.

    Jews this jews that, yeah and the majority of Jews don't even live in Israel.

    I'm asking Israel to return the same amount the Arabs took, I think the quite fair.

    Giving them a state(s) and a path to unifying with Israel as a single state eventually is not striping them of rights, in fact it a means of achieve all your goals, merely delayed with time.

    I have nothing against Palestine "defending" it self or controlling it airspace, just the whole suicide bombings and rocketing is not defending its self, its asinine. When Gaza and the west bank can be disconnect from Israel and stabilized I have not problem with them forming an army.

    The Arabs already took 3 times Israel in land area from all the jews they kicked out post the formation of Israel, they put the Palestinians on that, this whole thing would have been over.

    The UN approve the partition, the Israelis agreed and declared their independence, I think that satisfies your criteria.

    Come on the Palestinians and Jews were killing each other in a civil war, the outside Arab states had not right to get involved.

    Didn't stop the UN did it? Did it stop Israel declaring independence?, now you can arguing about interpretation of the law all you want, without it going through a court and it actually being judged on officially we won't know what was right or wrong, the historical facts are that Israel formed, it for out of civil war and outside intervention by 5 Arab states intent on taking the whole thing, and Israel won.

    The people choose to have their own state, that sound like self determination to me. Arabs don't need to pay for Israel crimes, just their own: they attacked and lost, they ruled over what was left of Palestine, they kicked out their own Jews and took everything, they refused to give the Palestinian refugees rights and end the suffering.
  21. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member


    Please cry me a river, many states were founded on the blood of natives and what should be done about it? I'm all for giving the Palestinians a state of there own, for re-merging with Israel, its just a matter of insure there is not a another blood bath.

    The Israelis had a right to a state of their own even though they held only ~30% of the population and 10% of the land verse the Palestinians holding <45% of the land, they and the Palestinians were incomparable, killing each other, it does not matter their common ancestry religion separates even blood! If they had been keep under one state then they would have just kept killing each other in mass.
  22. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    that's just it they didn't. the jewish populatiuon has zero right to their own state. in fact to split palestine to make states was a direct violation of the rules set up by the UN. No colonial holdings could be diveded in making a state. it sa fairy tale you believe because its the only way you can lie to your self and pretend stripping rights from the palestinians is moral.

    I'll just ignore what you calling the jews of palestine Israelis before there was an Israel could imply about you.
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2010
  23. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Sympathetic to Israel? Let them call it what they want, so long as they treat genetically similar fellow human beings (at least all most of them as such (some of their relatives Knew the other side like they say with a wink since the Bile. (Libel) Liable Bible.

Share This Page