Israel...

Risus

Genius
May 24, 2006
5,373
25
38
Toronto
I love your kind and feeling heart, Socrates! You are a good man and would never participate nor stand by idle in these brutalities. But look, what your "civilized" countries are capable of ....
See What Abortion Looks Like
or this here...
Botched Executions In The USA
Botched Executions
Photos of US Torture of Iraqi Prisoners At The Abu Ghraib Prison In Iraq : Indybay

I think we should not point fingers, but rather clean up our own acts first, then we can lead by being a good example. To go there and butcher their men, women and children; destroy their land and belongings... isn't looking good on us either.

LOL, the USA is civilized? Give me a break. The country is run (for a few more days) by a war criminal.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
I know, Zzarkov, I've heard that advice before. It is very difficult to truly believe anything one finds in print. There is a saying in German: "Papier ist geduldig." Meaning, paper is tolerant.
To a degree its tolerant, but the truth comes out when the paper is out of one groups reach so to speak.

If this info on Jew Watch is false, couldn't they be charged for slander? The Jews are otherwise so alert and go after anybody who says something about them that, in their opinion, isn't true. How can they let this slide?
Well for starters, its slander on dead people. You can't sue someone (a civil case) for a wrong that doesn't involve you.

And even if you did, the laws don't cross country to country, what county is the site hosted in? Who do you deliver papers to? What do the laws in that country say? If its Iran it might say that anything anti-jewish is fine. The internet is world wide.

Encyclopedias and wikipedias have to conform to the official Jewish version of events. One does not find the truth there either. It's too one-sided.

No, they don't. There is no "Jewish Version" of events, there is no massive Jewish conspiracy. There is just historical documented fact. Its "one sided" because there is one side thats correct. Likewise if you went reading to see if the sky was blue or polka dot, it would be pretty "one sided" that people agree the sky is blue. That doesn't mean it isn't somehow true. The Jewish faith is not as all powerful as people make it out to be, they are a tiny portion of the population. Its no different than Claiming the masons run everything or the Arabs run everything.



What is called "Revisionist" stuff is totally denied, no matter how well documented. I find it hard to believe historians will rather go to jail than retracting their findings as lies, or made up for the fun of it.
Germany is a different can of worms when it comes to their laws. But yes, alot of people will go to jail for what they believe is true. But believing something is true and it being true are different. Most of the "holocaust denial" documentation has shown to be false, repeatedly. But I welcome any scholarly work into the subject, as do most people, because its simply not possible to refute it when hundreds of thousands of people saw it with their own eyes.

The danger is that as time goes by, that will be glossed over, much in the same way people gloss over the Tyranny of Genghis Khan or the Aztecs.


If the Jews have to resort to this scare tactic to silence people, then, I think, they have something to hide.
What, in your opinion, is the reason for this almost world-wide law on silence?

1, there is no world wide law on silence. There is Germany, and perhaps Austria though I am not sure. The Germans use this "Scare tactic" because too many German people were trying to simply cover up what happened for the sake of national pride, pretend it didn't happen like a housewife who finds out her new husband is molesting her child. Pretend nothing is happening and lie.

The opposition to holocaust denial comes strongest not from Jewish citizens, but the Christian and Atheist veterans (And their relatives) who saw first hand and refuse to let this sink quietly away.


2, there is no "The Jews". Seriously. There is no "Jew International" or "Elders of Zion" or any other group of Jews. They aren't even like Catholics and do not have a pope. They are individuals, thats it.


Poland, apparently, is now also threatening to persecute people who say something unflattering about their State.

When will Germany follow suit?;-)

Germany already tried to go through with that, thats why the current laws in Germany on denying the holocaust are in place. Otherwise back in the late 40's people would have swept the issue under the rug.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
From the facts I know, which are well documented, it seems to me the Jews are in the wrong by taking the land from the Palestinians, that is, more land than was originally allotted them. From that fact alone I can understand the hostilities from the beleaguered Palestinians. The Arabs are probably asking, "why us?; why do the Western countries not give them a chunk of their land?"

Well Loon, here is the hypocrisy in that statement.

You stand as a European on Native Land. This land was taken from Native North Americans by Europeans through the unlawful use of force.

And while you yourself did nothing, nor did the Israeli citizens. In your case, the fighting was done even by the ancestors of others, you just immigrated here. So too is the case with more Israelis.

So If a native told you to abandon your house right now and leave , and all your children and their children had to leave Canada too? Would you? And if you didn't would they be right to shoot rockets at your house and try and kill your family?
 

einmensch

Electoral Member
Mar 1, 2008
937
14
18
Socrates--Cortez ,Pizarro greatly outnumbered like Israel defeated huge empires--so who is the threat -the Arabs with slingshots or Jews with with--
1.4 million Palestinians killed 9 Israelis--perhaps you need to rethink
-Israel attacked its neighbours not the other way around
-agreed Israel has not attacked Iran-it wants the USA to do it just like the USA attack on Iraq--so who is the threat?
 

einmensch

Electoral Member
Mar 1, 2008
937
14
18
Zz-the Israelis are taking land from the Palestinians now-Illegal settlements etc.--so cut your crap comparing immigrants to Canada after WW2-to Jews immigrating not to Israel but being paid to push out and take land from Palestinians now, today and tomorrow-the problem is not Jews immigrating to Israel--most of the world's Jews don't want to live in Israel -but for $350.oo you can pay for a poor Jew to go live in Israel-Palestine ?and push out some Palestinian family

If the Jews would have moved into Palestine in the 17&18 hundreds-they could have killed off the native population and gotten away with it but not in the 20th-21st century
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Zz-the Israelis are taking land from the Palestinians now-Illegal settlements etc.--so cut your crap comparing immigrants to Canada after WW2-to Jews immigrating not to Israel but being paid to push out and take land from Palestinians now, today and tomorrow-the problem is not Jews immigrating to Israel--most of the world's Jews don't want to live in Israel -but for $350.oo you can pay for a poor Jew to go live in Israel-Palestine ?and push out some Palestinian family

If the Jews would have moved into Palestine in the 17&18 hundreds-they could have killed off the native population and gotten away with it but not in the 20th-21st century


actually most of the "Zionist immigration" happened in the 19th century (At the same time we "opened up the west" by pushing out Metis families). Thats why the largest religion in Jerusalem were Jews in the mid 1800's, and they were the majority by 1896.

When the war in 1947 happened the Area already had a burgeoning Jewish population, thats why the term Palestinian meant "Jew" at that point. More Jewish folks immigrated afterwords, in large numbers sure.


But you're pretending that in North America we stopped shooting natives and taking their land ing the 1700's? Try again, the latter half of the 20th century, into the 70's I believe but I'd have to look into the exact dates.

But hey, thats just us right? Why hold us to the same standards as anyone else. Apparently your logic is somehow the "century" matters when this wrong occurred.

Typical.
 

dancing-loon

House Member
Oct 8, 2007
2,739
36
48
Thank you, Zzarchov, for your detailed answers. It is difficult to quote your page, as it only gives your answers out of context. So, I will later on respond separately. Just now I have an article in my mouse I would like to drop here for you to look over.
It's an article as one can find many and I'm sure you have read some yourself. I also already know your response to it!;-) The two of us are at opposite ends and probably will forever be at odds with each other on the Jewish issue. I truly would just like to discuss the issues, not kick you or anyone in the shins. You seem to have already understood that I don't appreciate being slandered or insulted, or called stupid, as some idiot has!:roll: If you find me too naive or stubborn or in any way annoying, just don't bother responding... I get the message.

Here now is the article:
False News Trial -- 04 Criminal Prosecution of 'Holocaust Denial'

One small excerpt from it:
Höss Testimony

One example of this might be the testimony of Rudolf Höss, an SS officer who served as commandant of Auschwitz. In its Judgment, the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal quoted at length from his testimony to support its findings of extermination. (note 14)
It is now well established that H°ss' crucial testimony, as well as his so-called "confession" (which was also cited by the Nuremberg Tribunal), are not only false, but were obtained by beating the former commandant nearly to death. (note 15) Hoess' wife and children were also threatened with death and deportation to Siberia. In his statement -- which would not be admissible today in any United States court of law -- H°ss claimed the existence of an extermination camp called "Wolzek." In fact, no such camp ever existed. He further claimed that during the time that he was commandant of Auschwitz, two and a half million people were exterminated there, and that a further half million died of disease. (note 16) Today no reputable historian upholds these figures. Hoess was obviously willing to say anything, sign anything and do anything to stop the torture, and to try to save himself and his family.
In my opinion the whole Nueremberg Trials were a sham, a circus. Just like in the recent case of Saddam Hussein...the victor crooks, through their proxy, hanged him!


But let me state this: I do believe many, many Jews and others died in the concentration camps. I think it was wrong what was done to the Jews! If I just imagine how awful it must have been to be ostracized and herded into uncomfortable barracks, not knowing one's fate for the next hour... that alone is terrible! It was not befitting for an intelligent, civilized nation to stoop to such degrading actions! I also feel that Germany, if it can, should pay reparations to the surviving Jews. I know Germany does generously.
Do you, Zzarchov, have some reputable documentation as to how many Jews survived their ordeals?
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
actually most of the "Zionist immigration" happened in the 19th century (At the same time we "opened up the west" by pushing out Metis families). Thats why the largest religion in Jerusalem were Jews in the mid 1800's, and they were the majority by 1896.

When the war in 1947 happened the Area already had a burgeoning Jewish population, thats why the term Palestinian meant "Jew" at that point. More Jewish folks immigrated afterwords, in large numbers sure.


But you're pretending that in North America we stopped shooting natives and taking their land ing the 1700's? Try again, the latter half of the 20th century, into the 70's I believe but I'd have to look into the exact dates.

But hey, thats just us right? Why hold us to the same standards as anyone else. Apparently your logic is somehow the "century" matters when this wrong occurred.

Typical.
..... and yours seems to be that just because they did it a while ago, it's excusable for someone else to do the same later. That is hardly a progressive attitude.
If the Israelis stop being oppressive and give the Palestinians some rope to at least try and live in peace, but keep up a relatively strict security, it'd at least be an attempt to come to some terms. If the Palestinians settle for the rope now and then work toward what they hope for, it'd be kinda nice. It's just stupidity to antagonize a superior force. You can't win, so the best thing to do is try to get along with it and seek for more trust and goodies or at least sidetrack it from paying attention to you.
It's a few hotheads with some pretty primitive attitudes that keep stirring the shyte to keep it fresh.
The past is the past. It is good not to forget it as long as the stupidities of the past aren't repeated.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
..... and yours seems to be that just because they did it a while ago, it's excusable for someone else to do the same later. That is hardly a progressive attitude.
If the Israelis stop being oppressive and give the Palestinians some rope to at least try and live in peace, but keep up a relatively strict security, it'd at least be an attempt to come to some terms. If the Palestinians settle for the rope now and then work toward what they hope for, it'd be kinda nice. It's just stupidity to antagonize a superior force. You can't win, so the best thing to do is try to get along with it and seek for more trust and goodies or at least sidetrack it from paying attention to you.
It's a few hotheads with some pretty primitive attitudes that keep stirring the shyte to keep it fresh.
The past is the past. It is good not to forget it as long as the stupidities of the past aren't repeated.

My logic is we cannot as Canadians sit here and pretend we didn't do the exact same thing at the exact same time, and then preach the Israelis do something we vehemently refuse to do ourselves.

I myself in another thread opposed Natives in Canada being treated with seperate laws and getting a "sentancing circle" to avoid punishment for getting drunk and killing his two children.

Often we hear cries about how natives should accept they are part of Canada, how they shouldn't be able to just pick up guns and occupy land they claim is theirs.

If we applied the demands we place on Israel to ourselves, we would have to do things much differently.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
My logic is we cannot as Canadians sit here and pretend we didn't do the exact same thing at the exact same time, and then preach the Israelis do something we vehemently refuse to do ourselves.

I myself in another thread opposed Natives in Canada being treated with seperate laws and getting a "sentancing circle" to avoid punishment for getting drunk and killing his two children.

Often we hear cries about how natives should accept they are part of Canada, how they shouldn't be able to just pick up guns and occupy land they claim is theirs.

If we applied the demands we place on Israel to ourselves, we would have to do things much differently.

I'm all for fair compensation for that which a person has actually lost. If one hasn't walked upon it or held it in one's hand, then it was never a part of his/her life.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
I'm all for fair compensation for that which a person has actually lost. If one hasn't walked upon it or held it in one's hand, then it was never a part of his/her life.

I agree, so does the world, except when it comes to Palestinians. They and they alone of all the displaced peoples in the world, are considered refugees to a land they have never seen, nor have their parents nor often grandparents.

And that is the critical issue in the peace process, whether the great-grandchildren of Palestinian Arabs have a right to displace the Grandchildren of legal immigrants to Israel, and force those grandchildren of legal immigrants away as refugees (as they can't "Go back", when you are 1/4 ethiopian, 1/4 russian, 1/4 American and 1/4 French where do you "Go back" to?)
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Palestinian "right of return" is unique because:

The UN helped create the Palestinian refugee problem in the first place and as a result shares responsibility with Israel for resolving it.

The UN passed a resolution which recognized Israel on condition that it allow Palestinians right of return.

...The one exception was at the Lausanne Conference, 1949, where a Joint Protocol was accepted by the Israeli government and the Arab delegates on May 12, 1949. Israel, under pressure due to its desire to become a member of the United Nations, agreed in principle to the repatriation of the Palestinian refugees. After Israel became a member of the United Nations, the only attempt at any repatriation was a short-lived offer to accept 100,000 refugees, but no more. This offer, which was rejected by the Arabs, was then quickly withdrawn by Israel.[1] David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, insisted in an interview with the members of the Conciliations Commission that as long as Israel could not count on the dedication of any Arab refugees to remain "at peace with their neighbors" - a consequence, he contended, of the Arab states' unwillingness to remain at peace with the state of Israel - resettlement was not an obligation for his country.[2]

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Israel can withdraw from the Unitied Nations and return to its status of disputed territory if its unwilling or unable to meet the terms of its recognition. Is 61 years of Israeli non-compliance with the terms of UN recognition, continued ethnic cleansing and war long enough? How much longer should Palestinians wait for Israel and the UN to abide by their "obligations" regarding them?
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
I agree, so does the world, except when it comes to Palestinians. They and they alone of all the displaced peoples in the world, are considered refugees to a land they have never seen, nor have their parents nor often grandparents.

And that is the critical issue in the peace process, whether the great-grandchildren of Palestinian Arabs have a right to displace the Grandchildren of legal immigrants to Israel, and force those grandchildren of legal immigrants away as refugees (as they can't "Go back", when you are 1/4 ethiopian, 1/4 russian, 1/4 American and 1/4 French where do you "Go back" to?)
The Jews lay claim to a piece of land that was taken away from them more than 2,000 years ago. Some of the things God took away were taken away in 600BC and never returned. A throne for a House of David King is one example.
Are you saying that their claim is valid where any claims made after 1900AD are not valid because some never actually possessed the land?
Being born in a refugee camp would be enough to disqualify a person from having a claim? 60 years of being a refuge will cause that, so what?

The person with 1/4 this and that should have the choice of going to all those countries or becoming a 'Native' of the country they are living in. Same living conditions we impose on reservations today (being poor is not applicable to all reservations because of oil & gas revenues)

66Stage : Free Movies Online
 
Last edited:

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Judaism is a religion, not a ethnic group. Apart from Zionists, the only other people who considered Jews to be a race were the Nazis.

Palestinians are the people who had the misfortune of living on land Zionists believe God gave to Jews. Palestinians are a people, not a religious group. They are Muslim, Christian and Jew. Jewish Palestinians were acepted by the Zionists. Most Muslim and Christian Palestinians became nationless refugees and have no regognized human rights. They are the people Zionists can kill with impunity. They are the people the world tries to ignore. They are the people who won't go away and die.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Judaism is a religion, not a ethnic group. Apart from Zionists, the only other people who considered Jews to be a race were the Nazis.

That is correct, Israelis are citizens (Jews, Muslim, Christian and Druze).

Palestinians are the people who had the misfortune of living on land Zionists believe God gave to Jews.

The real misfortune is that their government decided to allow immigrants (as does the Canadian government) even if it messed with the "Racial purity" of the Arab inhabitants (Muslim, Jewish and Christian alike).


Palestinians are a people, not a religious group.

No, Palestine is a chunk of dirt that had alot of Arabs on it. Palestinians describe themselves as Arab for a reason. The religious groups are Muslim, Christian and Jewish (even though often Jewish Palestinians are called settlers..regardless of how long they have lived in a region)

They are Muslim, Christian and Jew. Jewish Palestinians were acepted by the Zionists. Most Muslim and Christian Palestinians became nationless refugees and have no regognized human rights.

Right, so all the Christian, Muslim and Druze (the one you forgot) Israeli citizens who have been part of the nation since its birth..How do you explain them?

It seems the zionists accepted all Palestinians because Zionists WERE palestinians.

They are the people Zionists can kill with impunity. They are the people the world tries to ignore. They are the people who won't go away and die.

Zionism is by and large dead.

What you have a bunch of people born on the land being told to leave by people who's ancestors were born on the land.

This causes a logical impossibility.


Either you have a right to a land your ancestors lived on but you do not (in which case the Arab's who immigrated after the fall of Rome had no right to the land in the first place and should have been kicked out)

Or you don't have a right to the land your ancestors lived on but you never have (in which case the Jewish colonialism was crime as heinous as our nations founding, but Palestinian descended "refugees" have no right to return)

It can't work both ways.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
My logic is we cannot as Canadians sit here and pretend we didn't do the exact same thing at the exact same time, and then preach the Israelis do something we vehemently refuse to do ourselves.

I myself in another thread opposed Natives in Canada being treated with seperate laws and getting a "sentancing circle" to avoid punishment for getting drunk and killing his two children.

Often we hear cries about how natives should accept they are part of Canada, how they shouldn't be able to just pick up guns and occupy land they claim is theirs.

If we applied the demands we place on Israel to ourselves, we would have to do things much differently.
"It is good not to forget it [the past]as long as the stupidities of the past aren't repeated. " - me
 

einmensch

Electoral Member
Mar 1, 2008
937
14
18
Jews in 1900 Palestine Palestine 70,000 or 10%
The Jews in Palestine 1938: By Mahatma Gandhi (Mohandas Kirmachand Gandhi)

Frequently Asked Questions
Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home.
 

einmensch

Electoral Member
Mar 1, 2008
937
14
18
Zionist pioneers were almost absent in Palestine as of 1906, and constituted only 1% of the total Jewish population in Palestine.

Amid this savagery, land grabbing and dehumanization of the victims, both the United States and Israel have managed to convince themselves that the way they treated their victims was in fact humane and civilized. "No other conquering or colonizing nation has ever treated savage owners of the soil with such generosity as has the United States," Roosevelt said.

"Many people were inside the houses we started to demolish. They would come out of the houses while we where working on them. I found joy with every house that came down, because I knew they didn't mind dying, but they cared for their homes. If you knocked down a house, you bury 40 or 50 people for generations. If I am sorry for anything, it is for not tearing the whole camp down. This is the way I thought in Jenin. I didn't give a damn. If I had been given three weeks, I would have had more fun. That is, if they would let me tear the whole camp down. I have no mercy."

A few months ago---
The Israeli army has behaved as "as the most moral army in the world and the most careful army in the world."

When a "Jewish majority" was impossible to achieve, based on Jewish immigration and natural growth, Zionist leaders (such as Ben Gurion, Moshe Sharett, Ze'ev Jabotinsky, and Chaim Weizmann) concluded that "population transfer" was the only solution to what they referred to as the "Arab Problem."

From the beginning, Zionists advocated a "Jewish State" not just in Palestine, but also in Jordan, southern Lebanon, and the Golan Heights as well. In 1918 Ben-Gurion described the future "Jewish state's" frontiers in details as follows:
"to the north, the Litani river [in southern Lebanon], to the northeast, the Wadi 'Owja, twenty miles south of Damascus; the southern border will be mobile and pushed into Sinai at least up to Wadi al-'Arish; and to the east, the Syrian Desert, including the furthest edge of Transjordan" (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 87) Click here to view the "Greater Israel" map that was submitted by the Zionists to the peace conference after WWI.

GEE the Zionists knew in 1918 how Israel would look in 1969-Just by chance