Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Black Red Devil

Beneath troubled waters

195 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Sir Smoke aLot
15 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Ahhh.. that's not true in the case of the 1948 Arab/Muslim invasion, @Sir Smoke aLot. Israel was pathetically under-resourced in terms of both quantity - and quality - of weapons. At the start of the war, they had no artillery, no armour (tanks or APC's), no military aircraft (neither fighters or bombers), and no heavy machine guns. They had enough rifles and light automatic weapons (sten guns etc) for about 2/3rds of their troops. 

The Arab armies, on the other hand, had long-range artillery, tanks, APC's, Spitfires and Russiain Ilyushin bombers. 

There is a reason why Israel was on good terms with Chechoslovakia and other countries at the time. Arab world did not have much because WW1 has turned Israeli close region into British-French administered region. Situation which continued for long time. Situation on the field was such that Israeli forces (consisted mainly of militant and terrorist groups at the time) had enormous support from USA, mafia connections and other interests. By having such connections they were superior to native population and that resulted in ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Arabs.

While Arabs did have some of Russian weaponry Israel was equipped with German weaponry from WW2, afterall that region fall under influence of Allies but Russia under Stalin did not have luxury of having number of connections which Israel supporters had, especially in the region (mainly Britain and USA).

Israel, for your information, had British tanks. Also M4 Sherman but that was true for both sides.

So on both sided WW2 leftovers were used. Egypt mainly used tanks for purpose of fortifying positions not for invasion which is evident from images of military installations from the time.

It's simply not true that Israel was ''pathetically under-resourced'' :D

With so many Arab villages destroyed and demographic picture changed ( i am not even talking about areas which fell under Israeli sovereignty by UN plans ) it was clear that military superiority was not on any side.

What you are saying, basically, is that Israel, against all odds beat ten times stronger army!? :D Divine intervention or what? I did not see you as being so religious person haha

It's far more complicated than simply saying how Israel was inferior my friend. Check your sources.

Even US investigation which made picture of territory back in 1946 had one conclusions : Israel had better connections and better quality weapons.

23 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

That's very interesting @Sir Smoke aLot. I am aware of many private boycott organisations, and there is of course the Palestinian-led  "BDS" movement. But I was not aware of ANY governmental boycotts ? (oh.. with the exception of Iceland perhaps ? ). 

Many sanctions were covering a lot of products so that we can consider them as governmental boycotts. For example Ireland, which had quite difficult history, is part of many sanctions even today.

But, as i said, a lot of things have changed over the years. I recommend you to read about South African apartheid connections with Zionists. It was, i would say, kinda justifiable for Zionist cause because they did not have many options at the time. Only after it was evident that Israel is damaging it's own image with that relationship... Only then Zionists distanced themselves from that South African regime. That decision also opened many doors so i kinda see it that Israel is quite capable of turning bad situation into good one.

Also, targeting of BDS (which is directly attacking US constitution in anti BDS campaign in the USA) is done widely because it is highly damaging to Israeli economy even tho they won't admit it but moves against BDS do prove otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
24 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

There is a reason why Israel was on good terms with Chechoslovakia and other countries at the time. Arab world did not have much because WW1 has turned Israeli close region into British-French administered region. Situation which continued for long time. Situation on the field was such that Israeli forces (consisted mainly of militant and terrorist groups at the time) had enormous support from USA, mafia connections and other interests. By having such connections they were superior to native population and that resulted in ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Arabs.

While Arabs did have some of Russian weaponry Israel was equipped with German weaponry from WW2, afterall that region fall under influence of Allies but Russia under Stalin did not have luxury of having number of connections which Israel supporters had, especially in the region (mainly Britain and USA).

Israel, for your information, had British tanks. Also M4 Sherman but that was true for both sides.

 

I don't believe that is correct, @Sir Smoke aLot. Israel DID get its hands on Churchill and Sherman tanks, but only later in the war. At the outset, it had none. 

24 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Many sanctions were covering a lot of products so that we can consider them as governmental boycotts. For example Ireland, which had quite difficult history, is part of many sanctions even today.

But, as i said, a lot of things have changed over the years. I recommend you to read about South African apartheid connections with Zionists. It was, i would say, kinda justifiable for Zionist cause because they did not have many options at the time. Only after it was evident that Israel is damaging it's own image with that relationship... Only then Zionists distanced themselves from that South African regime. That decision also opened many doors so i kinda see it that Israel is quite capable of turning bad situation into good one.

Also, targeting of BDS (which is directly attacking US constitution in anti BDS campaign in the USA) is done widely because it is highly damaging to Israeli economy even tho they won't admit it but moves against BDS do prove otherwise.

Um.. no, not really @Sir Smoke aLot. There where no governmental sanctions until very recently. (Iceland last year, and Ireland a few months ago). 

The BDS movement deserves to be targeted. If it restricted itself to a boycot of goods produced in the settlements, then I could understand it. However,  it actually mandates the Right of Return, which would destroy Israel as 5 million relations of the original refugees flood back in, and vote for an Islamic Wafq. 

 

*add* .. hmm.. it occurs to me that I have wandered WELL of the point of the opening post. 

Edited by RoofGardener
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
9 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

The League of Nations grappled with the problem of what to do with the former nations that had been gobbled up - by force - by the defeated Islamic Ottoman Empire. And the levant was divided into THREE, not TWO. The land intended for the Arabs (as opposed to the jews) was gifted to TransJordan, to form the modern nation of Jordan. 

Everything that remained - from the River to the Sea - was supposed to be for the Jews. But the Arabs said "no" again. 

Umm... who, precisely, "SENT" the Jews into the Levant ? I was under the impression that the UK actually tried to PREVENT them from going ? 

As for "biggest social engineering blunder", I would have thought that the partition of India would take THAT crown ? 

Yes yes, how could I forget Trans Jordan. Another case if interference by the West. 

Anyway, "Everything that remained - from the River to the Sea - was supposed to be for the Jews. But the Arabs said "no" again. " - well what the hell do you *expect* them to say??? "Oh, sure, give the land to immigrant Euro Jews. We love your idea"... Good gawd.

Western interference with *their* land. And if you wish to deny that 700,000 Euro Jews were sent to the Levant (White Papers etc), then I don't wish to argue. But I never thought I'd hear total denial coming from you.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
5 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Seven Arab countries attacked Israel within 24 hours of it calling itself into being. This was before any issue in the UN, or any issue with Palestinians, other than the Palestinian Revolt.

Just a question, is that attack separate from the "War of Independence" or was that the war of independence?  I thought independence was declared at the conclusion of the war. edu-cum-ate me

 

PS: I see it again by you: "Ahhh.. that's not true in the case of the 1948 Arab/Muslim invasion,

So you are convinced that the Arab invasion occurred *after* the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

link

Britain has much to apologise for in Palestine

"Britain’s colonial past has left its mark in many parts of the world. But most of the peoples it ruled gained their independence after Britain left - except for the Palestinians. 

Instead, Britain promised their homeland to the Zionist movement through the 1917 Balfour Declaration, even before its occupation of historic Palestine."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

I like this writer, Kamel Hawwash . He really strikes a note here.  link
-----------------------------------------------------------------

70 years after the Nakba: What if Wales had been offered to the Jews as a homeland?

They say that charity begins at home. David Lloyd George, a proud Welshman, was British prime minister at the time of the declaration. What if the Balfour Declaration had read: "His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Wales of a national home for the Jewish people"?
--------------------

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "If you want to apologize to Jews for WWII, give them some of your land, not some of ours"

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80
On 2-8-2019 at 9:10 AM, and then said:

And if that happens and the Palestinians do the same thing they did when Gaza was vacated to them?  What then?


See thats it, thats the rational these sort of people maintain.. They will not stop their crimes against the Palestinians because.. what if the victim lashes out when the shakles are finally removed?

Disgusting, ab so lutely disgusting.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
44 minutes ago, Phaeton80 said:


See thats it, thats the rational these sort of people maintain.. They will not stop their crimes against the Palestinians because.. what if the victim lashes out when the shakles are finally removed?

Disgusting, ab so lutely disgusting.

Yes, disgusting.  Those who would probably welcome such an outcome are definitely disgusting.  The lie where the Palestinians decide to be satisfied with a portion of the land the Jews holds is just THAT...a LIE.  The world leaders know this.  The thing is, dear P80, those who wish for the Jews to be removed, forcibly or otherwise, are harboring a fantasy.  It really boggles the mind.  If the world is that committed to justice for Arabs in Palestine, let the world create a force to come against Israel and remove them.  Then we can see that justice is done in other areas where Colonialism has sown chaos.  

People like yourself and a few others here would not say a word against the Arabs of Palestine if they were given most of the land and then they still made war against Jews.  What does that make you?  A defender of "justice"?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
3 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

.....Western interference with *their* land. And if you wish to deny that 700,000 Euro Jews were sent to the Levant (White Papers etc), then I don't wish to argue. But I never thought I'd hear total denial coming from you.

who's land ? The arab nomads, or the invading turks ? 

As for the 700,000 jews... umm... who "sent" them, precisely ? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

who's land ? The arab nomads, or the invading turks ? 

The Palestinian's land. You know, the land where those rascally Palestinians live? Ya.

2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

As for the 700,000 jews... umm... who "sent" them, precisely ? 

I Stand corrected. I thought with the Balfour Declaration that Brits were for the emigration. Either that or I missed something.

"Herbert Samuel, a British Jew who served as the first High Commissioner of Palestine, placed restrictions on Jewish immigration “in the ‘interests of the present population’ and the ‘ absorptive capacity’ of the country.”1 The influx of Jewish settlers was said to be forcing the Arab fellahin (native peasants) from their land."

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
33 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

The influx of Jewish settlers was said to be forcing the Arab fellahin (native peasants) from their land."

The VAST majority of the Fellahin were squatters.  They didn't OWN the land.  Those Jews who came into the area to settle, build and grow, BOUGHT the land.  Earl, you mostly seem like a reasonable, fair-minded person.  What will you believe when the next peace agreement is struck and signed, the Palestinians receive a significant amount of what they are demanding, yet one group or other - Hamas or the PA - renew their attacks on the Jews, just as they did post-Gaza return?  What then?  I think reasonable people can look at the history of the area and can discern the likelihood of the conflict continuing is very probable.  Would you then expect the Jews to give MORE?  Or do you feel they'd be justified to fight for land that many of them were born into?  It's been 72 years.  WHEN do the Jews have a legitimate claim?  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
47 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

. I thought with the Balfour Declaration that Brits were for the emigration.

It was a political accommodation that the Brits promised, then reneged on - a typical politician's move.  The simplest and most crucial question here is, "how many deaths are acceptable to give the Palestinians what they demand in Arabic"?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

Well, lets see here....

3 hours ago, and then said:

They didn't OWN the land.  Those Jews who came into the area to settle, build and grow, BOUGHT the land. 

A clear contradiction, and then. Just WHO did the Jews buy the land from? Obviously from the Palestinians who owned it. I know from poking around back in the day that Palestinians in refugee camps still hold title to their home in Palestine. I also know that the second item destroyed by the Jews in their 1967 usurping of Palestinian land was the Palestinian's House of Deeds, so as to eliminate any legal claim in Israeli courts by the owners of the land (the first item destroyed was a Palestinian science museum). In fact, some of the people in what remained of Mandated Palestine were refugees from the first round of cleansing in 1946-48 era and were then faced with losing their second home to the Jews. Nice, huh?

4 hours ago, and then said:

Would you then expect the Jews to give MORE?  Or do you feel they'd be justified to fight for land that many of them were born into?

If you want me to say the latter, I will, but I refer that to the Palestinians. They are justified in fighting for the land they were born into. Some had homes that went back to the time of Christ and was handed down over the generations, long before the arrival of the Euro Jews. Yes, I hope they fight for what's rightfully theirs.

4 hours ago, and then said:

Earl, you mostly seem like a reasonable, fair-minded person.

Flattery will get you everywhere :rolleyes:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
2 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

clear contradiction, and then. Just WHO did the Jews buy the land from?

In most cases, it was from absentee landowners.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
4 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Well, lets see here....

A clear contradiction, and then. Just WHO did the Jews buy the land from? Obviously from the Palestinians who owned it. I know from poking around back in the day that Palestinians in refugee camps still hold title to their home in Palestine. I also know that the second item destroyed by the Jews in their 1967 usurping of Palestinian land was the Palestinian's House of Deeds, so as to eliminate any legal claim in Israeli courts by the owners of the land (the first item destroyed was a Palestinian science museum). In fact, some of the people in what remained of Mandated Palestine were refugees from the first round of cleansing in 1946-48 era and were then faced with losing their second home to the Jews. Nice, huh?

If you want me to say the latter, I will, but I refer that to the Palestinians. They are justified in fighting for the land they were born into. Some had homes that went back to the time of Christ and was handed down over the generations, long before the arrival of the Euro Jews. Yes, I hope they fight for what's rightfully theirs.

Flattery will get you everywhere :rolleyes:

Hmm... much of the land purchases where from Syrian and Lebanese landowners. Much of it was virtually abandoned land, occupied only by transient Bedouins. (abandoned because of the very poor soil conditions). I believe this accounted for about 50% of the land purchased prior to 1918 (when the British threw the Ottomans out and created the Mandate ? ). 

There is a very interesting Wikipedia article about this, along with some interesting observations about how poorly the "Palestinians" (or at least, the Palestinian peasant farmers) where treated by their foreign landlords. Many where massively in debt, and would have hailed the arrival of the British, as their debts to the foreign landlords would have been nullified. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_land_purchase_in_Palestine

I've tried googling this "house of Deeds" business.. but I can't seem to find anything about it ? Do you have any links to it ? I was under the impression that - prior to 1918 - the land deeds where held in either Damascus or Constantinople ? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
5 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm... much of the land purchases where from Syrian and Lebanese landowners. Much of it was virtually abandoned land, occupied only by transient Bedouins. (abandoned because of the very poor soil conditions). I believe this accounted for about 50% of the land purchased prior to 1918 (when the British threw the Ottomans out and created the Mandate ? ). 

There is a very interesting Wikipedia article about this, along with some interesting observations about how poorly the "Palestinians" (or at least, the Palestinian peasant farmers) where treated by their foreign landlords. Many where massively in debt, and would have hailed the arrival of the British, as their debts to the foreign landlords would have been nullified. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_land_purchase_in_Palestine

I've tried googling this "house of Deeds" business.. but I can't seem to find anything about it ? Do you have any links to it ? I was under the impression that - prior to 1918 - the land deeds where held in either Damascus or Constantinople ? 

Interesting read and good link. The map looks very similar to one that I had been familiar with, Jewish land purchases in the west and north, mostly. And that, of course, is how any civilized people should acquire land, or anything else of value, for that matter. So much for their short lived civility.

I may have used the informal rather than appropriate name, "Registry of Deeds".

Anyway, can't find the link. It was a long time ago. Not really a good excuse. Relying on memory is not a valid way, not in this case.

 

Just as an aside here, poking around I found this  House Demolitions

"House demolition is a method used by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) in Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip against Palestinians. Since the occupation of the Palestinian territories following the Six-Day War in 1967 down to 2015, it has been estimated by the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions that Israel has razed 48,488 Palestinian structures."

48 thousand, HO-LEE. What's left, for gods sake. And "housing codes" are kept by the Israeli military.  uh huh. the thugs.

Anyway, no signs of links to the '67 destroyed science museum or registry of deeds as to that era. There were mentions of many cultural buildings being bombed or razed over time.

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
6 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

I've tried googling this "house of Deeds" business.. but I can't seem to find anything about it ? Do you have any links to it ? I was under the impression that - prior to 1918 - the land deeds where held in either Damascus or Constantinople ? 

The question I keep asking and never seem to get a realistic answer for is this - How much bloodshed, how many dead are the supporters of the Palestinians willing to countenance?  It is obvious, or should be, that the Jews of Israel are never going to just strike camp and go back into a Diaspora voluntarily.  They will fight to remain and removing them by force would lead to horrific casualties.  I believe that this is going to happen at some point, just a matter of time.  I'd like to hear from those who support the Palestinians, how they foresee this accommodation between Arab and Jew.  If they visualize a peaceful situation where Israel commits national suicide or whether they are okay with a very bloody war where 100s of thousands die to return that land to the surrounding nations.  It will never be given to individual Palestinians.  It would be parceled amongst Jordan, Egypt, Syria...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
11 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

"House demolition is a method used by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) in Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip against Palestinians. Since the occupation of the Palestinian territories following the Six-Day War in 1967 down to 2015, it has been estimated by the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions that Israel has razed 48,488 Palestinian structures."

48 thousand, HO-LEE. What's left, for gods sake. And "housing codes" are kept by the Israeli military.  uh huh. the thugs.

Anyway, no signs of links to the '67 destroyed science museum or registry of deeds as to that era. There were mentions of many cultural buildings being bombed or razed over time.

 

Hmm..... almost 50,000 houses in 50 years ? So 1000/year. 

That DOES seem a TRIFLE excessive. That's a small town ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
On 8/6/2019 at 3:10 PM, RoofGardener said:

Israel DID get its hands on Churchill and Sherman tanks, but only later in the war. At the outset, it had none. 

Those were used in war. It would be silly of Zionists to overextend by so much and to work towards larger confrontation in order to expel native population, all of that without ''tools'' to back them up. They were far better organized than that, and were also planing ahead.

On 8/6/2019 at 3:10 PM, RoofGardener said:

There where no governmental sanctions until very recently.

This is where we disagree. I leave it there.

On 8/6/2019 at 3:10 PM, RoofGardener said:

The BDS movement deserves to be targeted.

By condemning and outlawing BDS message sent is that ''Hamas way is the only way!''

Boycott and divestment is civilized way of fighting for your freedom. If you take that away... Do not cry when consequences arise. Such absurd conclusions, one day it's ''hey you should peacefully fight'' and when they actually manage to do something Zionist lobby destroys it. Disgusting, too bad that you do not see it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
On 8/6/2019 at 5:38 PM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Yes yes, how could I forget Trans Jordan. Another case if interference by the West. 

Anyway, "Everything that remained - from the River to the Sea - was supposed to be for the Jews. But the Arabs said "no" again. " - well what the hell do you *expect* them to say??? "Oh, sure, give the land to immigrant Euro Jews. We love your idea"... Good gawd.

Western interference with *their* land. And if you wish to deny that 700,000 Euro Jews were sent to the Levant (White Papers etc), then I don't wish to argue. But I never thought I'd hear total denial coming from you.

 

Under Ottoman empire it was clear that Trans Jordan was one independent region while Palestine was the other. In no way were the rights to acclaim any of those regions given to either Brits or French. British and French had no right what so ever to decide future or sovereignty or regions which were part of Ottoman empire as it has ceased those under certain conditions which were agreed upon. That is common knowledge, or at least it should be.

This can be confirmed simply by looking at relevant documents which were signed after WW1. 

22 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

As for the 700,000 jews... umm... who "sent" them, precisely ? 

Zionists with close cooperation with Goebels associates in mid 1930's and after it was further hastened under Transfer Agreement.

One interesting piece of history to confirm this :

The-Nazi-Zionist-Connection-Coin.jpg

There are many sources i just picked one from google. Check the story behind this.

More generally, about land purchases.

If it was all legal and clear why did Zionist terror groups had to commit many horrible crimes, why did they had to clear villages, literally, by murdering every living being in them? Why didn't they buy that land too?

Because most Palestinians did not want to sell their land. There is a reason why Israeli government has closed every document regarding Nakba. Not even Israeli scholars are given access anymore, LINK for reference, subject is quite interesting.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot

Thing is that even from minor concerns in international cooperation, Trans Jordan and Palestine were always regarded as two unique independent countries. This can be confirmed with relevant chapters in Geneva convention and League of Nations covenant, if i remember correctly.

Let's take this environmental concern for example, LINK.

I am not sure how is such myth promoted in 2019. It's beyond me. 

As for land purchases, or in the other words : ''Jews merely bought the land from Palestinians and no one was attacked, murdered or expelled, it was all legal''.

Why do official documents prove that 70% Arabs were forcibly expelled? 

Village of Safsaf and what happened there is more than enough to disprove such claims. I happened to read more then few books by respected scholars who are Zionist supporters and they all agree, beyond doubt that it was ethnic cleansing.

Question : ''can inferior army commit ethnic cleansing?'' Thank you very much.

Now can we go back to topic finally? When will Israel give fair share of wealth to Palestinians? As occupying power they only have right to take what is necessary for military machine.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
1 hour ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

By condemning and outlawing BDS message sent is that ''Hamas way is the only way!''

Boycott and divestment is civilized way of fighting for your freedom. If you take that away... Do not cry when consequences arise. Such absurd conclusions, one day it's ''hey you should peacefully fight'' and when they actually manage to do something Zionist lobby destroys it. Disgusting, too bad that you do not see it.

 

 

Wait.. hold on.. you are refusing to discuss the terms of the Palestinian "BDS" movement ? 

I mean.. really ? 

You refuse to even DISCUSS the fact that the Palestinian BDS movement calls for the destruction of Israel ? 

I mean.. we can DISCUSS it.. but you refuse to do that ? 

 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
43 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Wait.. hold on.. you are refusing to discuss the terms of the Palestinian "BDS" movement ? 

I mean.. really ? 

You refuse to even DISCUSS the fact that the Palestinian BDS movement calls for the destruction of Israel ? 

I mean.. we can DISCUSS it.. but you refuse to do that ? 

 

It's the dirty little "not so" secret they have in common.  They KNOW that for the Palestinians to gain their ultimate goal, Israel must be destroyed, completely.  Root and branch.  They just don't wish to admit the heinous fact that their wishes are predicated upon.  These same that support the Palestinians would probably give only mild lip service against a genocide of the Jews there.  A REAL genocide.  And the majority of the nations on this planet would react similarly.

Edited by and then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

Wait.. hold on.. you are refusing to discuss the terms of the Palestinian "BDS" movement ? 

I mean.. really ? 

You refuse to even DISCUSS the fact that the Palestinian BDS movement calls for the destruction of Israel ? 

I mean.. we can DISCUSS it.. but you refuse to do that ? 

 

So you would argue that it is better to prevent people of using peaceful means of fighting for their freedom, by pressuring occupier? That is shallow reasoning. And where did you come up with ''destruction of Israel'' as goal of BDS?

Excuse me but you can not always make the same accusation and present is as an excuse.

I will give you pleasure of explaining my position and what essentially BDS is so let me explain.

''Boycott divestment and sanctions''.

Let's now be reasonable here - those three legitimate options of fight could, of course, result in great damage to Israeli economy if Israel doesn't change it's violent prosecution of non Jewish people in Israel and if it does not end occupation and finally starts to work towards returning Palestine to what it should be, sovereign state. After all that is Israel's OBLIGATION under international law and under everything which occupier MUST do. Not SHOULD do, they are OBLIGED to end occupation as soon as possible (it lasts for decades now regardless!).

Understand now?

Now, the destruction part.

Yes! If things get global and if BDS succeeds in it's work it will economically destroy Israel. Such situation would result in destruction of state because without funding and growing economy no state in the world could survive. But not the kind of destruction which you imply here. If Israel gives rights to others it will never have to get to the point of BDS campaign damaging Israeli economy and state as whole in the end! It's on Israel, not on BDS. South African apartheid was shut down by sanctions!

So please, don't be silly.

Your logic is flawed over this or you simply fail to understand the basics. That is the reason why i do not want to be dragged into absurd discussions.

So it's not me who is the problem here.

Satisfied?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
33 minutes ago, and then said:

It's the dirty little "not so" secret they have in common.  They KNOW that for the Palestinians to gain their ultimate goal, Israel must be destroyed, completely.  Root and branch.  They just don't wish to admit the heinous fact that their wishes are predicated upon.  These same that support the Palestinians would probably give only mild lip service against a genocide of the Jews there.  A REAL genocide.  And the majority of the nations on this planet would react similarly.

Read my post above, Zionist propaganda is powerful but not deciding, which i am glad to see. This prosecution, witch hunt against BDS, lobbying in many states (USA and Germany have supported Zionist wishes so far) and all which is happening is just a proof that Zionists have a lot to fear from.

Not only this part, about BDS but about criticizing Israel too, in the USA one can not apply to work in anything government related if he or she doesn't sign papers which oblige them to never criticize Israel. Democracy? I do not know how i would call it... Nothing good.

So take your ''genocide against Jews'' to BS pit where it belongs, Palestinians are inferior and have no ability to endanger illegal settlements :D What makes you think it can endanger Jewish people as whole? WOW man.

Other than that, not every Jew is supporting Israel, many are against brutal policies and they rally often to express their support for peace and humanity so time will come when Zionists will lose their artificial right over Jewish people who have suffered greatly because of Zionism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.