Call for a Peaceful End to Zionism
- Thread starter earth_as_one
- Start date
I don't care what the reason for eviction was. In my point of view it's dysfunctionally antisocial behavior on both sides.
I missed the bit about wondering about large text. When you reply or quote someone at the top of the space your text goes in, there are two As one is superimposed over the other. Now you shoft your eyes to the right and there will be the name of the font and then a number, click the down-arrow to the right of the font name and a list of numbers drops down. Those are font sizes. The font I'm using right now is "2". Font size "1" is really small and font size 7 is.........
For starters. That isn't truth, it's an opinion. Truth is arceological and historic accuracy. Such as this...
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/history/55217-history-israel-palestine.html
Secondly, you bark about us being "Know nothing revisionists" and you post that tripe. That is the most glaring example of revisionist opinion I have ever seen.
I think I'll stick with time honoured historical facts and leave the use of ahistorical revisionist opinion to you.
Can someone explain how you can be a Canadian Citizen who's ancestors immigrated without the consent of the natives who's ancestors were here first...
Can think who's ancestors come from where matters in terms of who was born and lives in Israel now and who wasn't?
How can you on the one hand say "that isn't how it works" and then reap the benefits of a the same situation?
Can think who's ancestors come from where matters in terms of who was born and lives in Israel now and who wasn't?
How can you on the one hand say "that isn't how it works" and then reap the benefits of a the same situation?
For gopher that's easy, he's...
1/1,000,000th Jewish
1/1,000,000th Native American
1/1,000,000th Some form of Arab
1/1,000,000th something else
1/1,000,.. Well you get the point.
This somehow makes it ok in some peoples minds. But then look at the ahistoric tripe they post as historic evidence and viola, you fully understand their flawed logic.
Zzarchov, I've raised this question several times. It's been dismissed sevral times, by earth, juan and as far as I can remember, gopher has never answered.
I hate to tell you guys this but there's evidence that Europeans were here about 20,000 years ago.
http://www.amazon.ca/First-American...ef=sr_1_5/701-2866725-9195555?ie=UTF8&s=books
And here's something from NatGeo about people being here 28,000 years ago:
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0012/feature3/
http://www.amazon.ca/First-American...ef=sr_1_5/701-2866725-9195555?ie=UTF8&s=books
And here's something from NatGeo about people being here 28,000 years ago:
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0012/feature3/
Those were vague at best LG, but if you are referring to Viking settlements along the eastern seaboard, they were run off by the Natives.
The Siberian Alaskan trek only happened about 12,000 years ago. Clovis points (originated in what is now northern France) were found in strata dating back about 20,000 years. I was unaware of the Nat Geo stuff till just recently, but that goes back to 28,000 years. Vague it may be but it is still evidence and throws doubt on "first nations" claims. Sorry, but I gotta go with the evidence.
Even if people were here before "first antions" people, it doesn't excuse the ME people, however.
Even if people were here before "first antions" people, it doesn't excuse the ME people, however.
The 'vague' came from the fact that I couldn't find the information you were trying to direct us to, but just excerpts of, with no real meat. I need meat, lol.
Um, BTW, Vikings weren't around till about the 9th century (only about 1200 years ago). I read that Irish and Welsh were here before the Vikings, Celtic people might have been here before that even, and Phoenicians before that. But, 28.000 years ago is waaaaaaaaay past those even.
I'm not going to dig into my Nat Geo mag and retype it out in here. Nor will I dig out the book by Adovasio and type that out in here either. The book isn't that expensive nor is the Nat Geo mag.
Might be able to learn more here: http://www.centerfirstamericans.com/
The NatGeo article was in December 2000.
Last edited:
Notice how Koestler is referred to as a revisionist by the critics here even though he was an Askenazim Jew and perhaps the world's foremost authority on the subject. Note also how nobody addresses the issue of Communist Zionism. More criticism but no refutation, as usual.
In my point of view it's dysfunctionally antisocial behavior on both sides.
No dispute from me on that point.
What is troubling is the idea that Zionism has some biblical basis. It obviously doesn't and the critics would know it if they bothered to read the Bible. As for the idea that Zionism is a humane ideology, again, it was founded by a socialist, the zionist state was founded by a socialist, and its founding was endorsed and largely financed by Stalin. Therefore, conservatives who claim to be so antisocialist should be against its continued support by the West.
No dispute from me on that point.
What is troubling is the idea that Zionism has some biblical basis. It obviously doesn't and the critics would know it if they bothered to read the Bible. As for the idea that Zionism is a humane ideology, again, it was founded by a socialist, the zionist state was founded by a socialist, and its founding was endorsed and largely financed by Stalin. Therefore, conservatives who claim to be so antisocialist should be against its continued support by the West.
Originally Posted by Zzarchov
Can someone explain how you can be a Canadian Citizen who's ancestors immigrated without the consent of the natives who's ancestors were here first...
Canadian confederation was in 1867. Canada has been a country for 139 years. Canada is recognised by every other country of note in the world. I was born here. Why do I need consent from anyone? What is to explain? Nonsense!
Note the "know nothing revisionist"(your words) has posted the archeological history of the area, several times. Only to have it ignored by the touters of revisionism and lovers of the Arab nazi party. I have not only refuted it it, I have proved your entire paper platform wrong. Get over it. Just because you ignore it, doesn't mean I didn't refute it.
Once again, just because you ignore my posts, does not mean I did not refute your BS assertions. The fact that Zionism and Marxism (note:not Communism) is linked, I have no need to challenge what is fact. I only challenged your ridiculous insinuation that Zionism was related to Stalinism. Which it is most definetly not. Besides, the only people claiming Zionism exists, is you and earth. The rest of the educated world pretty much know it's dead and gone for the most part.
Again, only you and earth claim it exists. No one else claims anything of it, except the lack of its relevance.
Precicely Israel's point, good call juan. Good to see you came to your senses.
And How does that differ from Israel?
Why is it ok for you to say "I was born here, why do I need consent from anyone"
But then you tell and Israeli that is not ok for him/her to say "I was born, here why do I need consent from anyone".
Israel too has been a nation for many years, recognized by every nation of note.
Haganah: Socialist
http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/Haganah.htm
Haganah - (Hebrew - pronounced "hah gah nah' ) Literally "defense." Underground organization officially founded June 1920 during the British Mandate for Palestine, to protect the Jewish Yishuv (settlement) from Arab riots and violence. The Haganah became the unofficial army of the Jewish Agency. The nucleus of its leadership was taken from the Zionist socialist movements and the Kibbutzim, and was a model of a citizens' army. The Haganah evolved into an effective military force by 1948 and was able to hold its own against the Arabs of Palestine and the invading armies of Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Arab irregulars despite inferiority in arms and numbers during the initial fighting. The Haganah refrained from attacks on civilians and on political figures for the most part, unlike the Irgun and Lehi terror groups. The Haganah was converted into the IDF following the foundation of the state of Israel in May1948. The Haganah philosophy and political opinions were to some extent reflected in the organization of the IDF.
Theodore Herzl: socialist
Haganah: socialist
Ben-Gurion: socialist
major ally: Stalin
http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/Haganah.htm
Haganah - (Hebrew - pronounced "hah gah nah' ) Literally "defense." Underground organization officially founded June 1920 during the British Mandate for Palestine, to protect the Jewish Yishuv (settlement) from Arab riots and violence. The Haganah became the unofficial army of the Jewish Agency. The nucleus of its leadership was taken from the Zionist socialist movements and the Kibbutzim, and was a model of a citizens' army. The Haganah evolved into an effective military force by 1948 and was able to hold its own against the Arabs of Palestine and the invading armies of Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Arab irregulars despite inferiority in arms and numbers during the initial fighting. The Haganah refrained from attacks on civilians and on political figures for the most part, unlike the Irgun and Lehi terror groups. The Haganah was converted into the IDF following the foundation of the state of Israel in May1948. The Haganah philosophy and political opinions were to some extent reflected in the organization of the IDF.
Theodore Herzl: socialist
Haganah: socialist
Ben-Gurion: socialist
major ally: Stalin
So you are saying the IDF are socialists? Or just have some socialist ideas? Or they are zionists? I bet there are some in the IDF that aren't even Jewish.
Anyway, it sounds to me like zionism dwindled down to not much of anything after 1948, and here we are 60 years later .......
Anyway, it sounds to me like zionism dwindled down to not much of anything after 1948, and here we are 60 years later .......