More than 200 rockets fired into Israel from Gaza after Islamic Jihad leader killed

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by Thedimon, Nov 12, 2019.

  1. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I did actually - some of the biggest debate on these issues comes from withing Israel - and from Jewish people who do not live in Israel. Most Jews are Democrat - supposedly "the anti Semetic Left"

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/sep/25/israel
     
    Jazz likes this.
  2. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    7,695
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This below is what Hamas said.
    Peace will come through the removal of all Jews from the Jewish ancestral land.
    And this will be achieved through violence.
    Offers of industrial parks, airports, seaports, land in the Negev, artificial islands,
    partial right of return, high speed rail link, economic cooperation and the like will
    not be accepted.
    And when we pull down the terror fence we are going to start bombing, stabbing
    and shooting like in the good old days.


    DzcN-06W0AAl_QT.jpg
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2019
  3. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    7,695
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Israel HAS said that negotiations for the "right of return" will begin
    if and when there final negotiations. I suppose most in Israel know
    there never will be such negotiations because the Arabs can't bring
    themselves to accept the Jews were in Palestine long before it was
    even called Palestine by the Romans.
     
  4. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    18,965
    Likes Received:
    3,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Your claim was that ME Jews were the majority of Jews in Palestine during the time of the Mandate. Presumably you were trying to suggest that there was some longterm large Jewish presence there. This is not true. Obviously statistics are hard to get. MidEast Web used to be quite reliable until the owner died. Although a Zionist he genuinely intended that web site as far as possible to be accurate. I can remember some years ago reading that around 100 years before the State of Israel was born Jews were 3% of the population of the area. When we get up to the Balfour Declaration they seem to be rated as at 10-14% but obviously this had already seen about 30 years of Western Jewish immigrants. Many of the indigenous Palestinian Jews were not in favour of Zionism, even fighting on the side of their countrypeople in the final try to secure their country during Arab revolt of 36-39. They would have been the only ME Jews at this time.

    Of course after Israel took what had been suggested as her state and half of what had been suggested as the Arab State there was a reaction and lack of trust in Arab countries. This took many different forms not least in not letting Jews out. It should also be mentioned here that many of these ME Jews were staunch Nationalists who did not support Zionism and they suffered as well. This of course went with the Zionist's original plan of transfer of the people.

    The Holocaust of course deprived Zionists the ability to create a truly white state and so bit by bit ME Jews came in but I think even here you are way exaggerating. During the mandate ME Jews were not the majority in Palestine, They were a tiny minority, many of whom fiercely opposed Zionism. Yes there was an influx as the Arab States reacted to the actions of Israel and lost confidence in their Jews - arguably Arabs then acted like the Right is now towards Muslims - blaming them all for the actions of a few - and in this instance those few were foreigners.

    My memory told me that it was still a long time until ME Jews were a majority in Israel and it appears that in 2009 they were a majority of 50.2%. That would seem like when they became so.

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


    You have been given poor training if you believe trying a tactic such as that has any legitimacy. The book is written by an Israel academic who thoroughly researched the topic. So what I said was that the vast majority of Jews who died in the holocaust were not Zionists and that very few of the survivors wanted to move to Palestine. If you read the book you would find it was originally about 14%. Then came a long time of refusing to allow them to move anywhere else - unless they were not fit like Finkelstein's parents. They were psychologically pushed to say they wanted to go to Palestine and fight for Israel calling them 'traitors' when they did not agree. Forcing them and orphans to stay for years in camps until they agreed to go to Palestine, for many of them having survived the holocaust to their death in the 48 war. They describe how the Zionists stopped Jews from taking the orphans to camps in other countrys for physical and mental care. Even the British one which was set up and worked by Jews was not acceptable to the Zionists. They wanted all the Orphans in their new country and whether they were ****ed up, whether they had any love and compassion to remember from their childhood was not of interest. Even after keeping holocaust survivors in camps for several years, the Zionists managed to get less than half of them to move to Palestine. It was only after the UN resolution on Partition that the Zionists allowed survivors to go to other countries. The reason is obvious. One of their main claims were that these Holocaust survivors were still in camps because no one could take them. Nothing could be further from the truth. Arrangements had been made by Roosevelt for Britain, the US (which was the most desired country of survivors) and several other countries to take their share of displaced persons. Even during the war Zionists in the US were calling these arrangements antisemitism. Read the book and you will find everything I have said is true with quotes.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2019
  5. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    18,965
    Likes Received:
    3,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I have no idea why this part is not showing. It is still there when I click edit but not visible.
    You could take it even from what they called themselves. The first attempt was called 'The Jewish Colonisation Project'.

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

    The first Zionist bank was called the Jewish Colonial Trust.

    https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-colonial-trust

    Zionism of course was Colonialism of the kind that relied on an imperial power but was not so much for exploiting the people and its resources, not so much for economic gain as more a place of refuge. Similar can be seen in the colonialism of the US, Canada, Australia and South Africa and no doubt one of the reasons why they give Israel so much support and at least one of the reasons why Israel gave Apartheid South Africa so much support.

    In http://whtt.org/wp-content/uploads/...ce-of-Abraham-Church-of-Scotland-20130501.pdf the Church of Scotland explains that the saying of Palestine being a' a land without a people for a people without a land' describes the Imperialist/Colonialist thinking of the time – that a place which was not ruled by white people was a place without a people. I have since read this was a fairly typical way of calling countries by white Supremacist Colonialism which did not have white people.

    One of the characteristics of these settler colonial projects, with the exception of SA was to get rid of the indigenous people and this most certainly was the intent of Zionism. They never wanted to work with the Palestinians. When the British suggested Democracy they would not hear of it - for obvious reasons. As evidence shows in archives, letters and so on in 'State of Terror- How Terrorism create Modern Israel', and as is also recounted in the second link I will give on this, early Zionists, had a very racist few of the Palestinians seeing them as beneath them as human beings, totally going with the White Supremacist viewpoint of the west of the time.

    http://paldocs.net/

    https://www.palestine-studies.org/resources/special-focus/zionist-settler-colonialism

    Most of these settler states committed genocides of the people living in them. Zionism came to late. It arrived at a time when Colonialism was going out of fashion, when the US in particular was strongly against it believing in supporting self determination (admittedly that did not last long) That has left Israel with the issue of how to get rid of the Palestinians till today when we find ourselves yet again back in the mentality of ethnic nationalism of the 30's and Israel as Ilan Pappe says in the lecture below is no longer pretending. This is an excellent lecture which goes in full detail the reality of Israel as a colonial project. There are no if's or buts.

     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2019
    Jazz likes this.
  6. Jazz

    Jazz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    7,114
    Likes Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Oh yes, the pilot's refusal I've read some time ago, but then promptly forgotten. Thanks for bringing it to the surface again. Not all is lost with the Jews, some still do have morals and dignity.
     
  7. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    7,695
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Hi, I have a dozen questions for you, thanks.

    Should the Jews go back to where they come from?
    Should Israel be judged by the pre-nation terrorists it repudiated, like the Irgun, Lehi, Haganah etc..?
    Did the Arabs of the Levant "rely upon colonial powers" themselves, like the Turks, Jordanians and Egyptians?
    What evidence do you have that Zionism was about "getting rid of indigenous people"?
    How is it that two million Arabs still live in Israel?
    Why did Israel call upon the Arabs in 1948 and 1967 not to flee?
    Why did the Arabs threaten, abuse or kills Arabs who did not flee?
    How do you colonize your own country?
    When did Arabs colonize the Levant?
    Why is it the Arabs can lose every war with the Jews, but the Jews can't lose one war?
    How come the oppressive colonizers of Palestine cannot even worship on their own temple mount?
    The offer made to Hamas - rail, sea and air links, industrial parks, more land and aid - why was it rejected?


     
  8. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Jews are extremely intelligent as a group. 50% of the top "world champion" Grandmasters are of Jewish Descent - out of a tiny population.

    Their culture encourages "questioning" of all things - even God ... as opposed to Christianity/Islam where one is not to "Question" "Just Believe" "Just have faith" - this does not cut it with the Jews.

    Many in Israel are against the occupation - and want peace. Its the extremist Zionists that do not. The Palestinians obviously are not helping the process much either.

    In terms of a people - I will take Jews over these Muslim extremists any day. In terms of respect for the rule of law - international law and so on ... I am color blind and call a spade a spade.

    Israel made a truce with Hamas/Hezbollah .. then went out and assassinated one leader and attempted to assassinate another (ending up killing 9 innocents) This is BS - no kidding they then fired a bunch of rockets. Israel was the one that broke the ceasefire and was the provocateur.
     
  9. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    28,023
    Likes Received:
    19,312
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Another line proving that bias against Jews is being sold as concern for Palestinians.
     
    Pisa likes this.
  10. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    7,695
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hey, I thought Islamic Jihad were firing rockets at Israel in the week preceding this
    assassination. And I wasn't aware Israel had any truce with Islamic Jihad. And I
    thought this al-Ata guy was developing more precision missiles to kill Israeli civilians.

    What occupation? I thought Israel withdrew from Gaza? Was there an issue when
    Egypt controlled Gaza? Was there an issue when Jordan owned the West Bank?
    Was there an issue when Turkey owned the lot? And what is this about Hamas
    killing dissidents?

    Think of this number
    Half a million Jews were evicted from Arab nations.
    About the same number of Palestinians attend Israeli hospitals every year.
     
  11. Jazz

    Jazz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    7,114
    Likes Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Hello!
    Here comes the latest and greatest news from the great leader of the United States of America:

    US no longer considers Israeli settlements illegal

    Pompeo says US will no longer abide by 1978 State Department opinion that settlements are against international law.
    2 hours ago

    [​IMG]
    Monitor groups say Israeli settlements have surged under the Trump administration


    "After carefully studying all sides of the legal debate, this administration agrees... (the) establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not, per se, inconsistent with international law," Pompeo said.


    According to several United Nations Security Council resolutions, the most recent in 2016, Israeli settlements are illegal under international law as they violate the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits an occupying power from transferring its population to the area it occupies.

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019...ium=article_page&utm_campaign=read_more_links
    ----
    Alright, now we can all relax and go home. The Empire made a decision! The BDS just flew out the window!!
    I just wonder, why is Trump doing this right now as he is sitting in an impeachment pressure cooker? He needs help! Maybe this is a tit-for-tat arrangement? You help me stay in office and I see to it you get the West Bank.
    What do you think, folks?
     
    alexa likes this.
  12. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    7,695
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is a photo of Jerusalem? If so it's the natural capital of the Jewish people for
    thousands of years. Not Arabs, but Jews.
    Are you noting what China is doing - Sth China Seas, Hong Kong, the shocking
    abuse of its Muslim populations (somehow what China does with Muslims always
    is "different" to how Jews treat Muslims - though the Chinese Muslims offer no
    existential threat to China.)
    And Russia? In the Ukraine, Georgia, Baltics, Chechnya etc.. See how Russia
    treats Muslims?

    Maybe this is just more anti American racism?
     
  13. Jazz

    Jazz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    7,114
    Likes Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Good Grief, Poohbear, do you have an upset stomach? Take some Alka-Seltzer or start your own threads about China, Russia, Muslims etc.!!
    Or....
    [​IMG] ;-)
     
  14. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    7,695
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who wants to go on about how China treats Uighurs?
    or what Russia did to Chechnya?
    But Clinton stopping the Serbs from killing Muslim Bosnians
    had the "peace movement" in a rage about US Imperialism.
    Nothing to do with Muslims at all - same with Palestine.

    I think most anti-Americanism is about Envy.
     
  15. Jazz

    Jazz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    7,114
    Likes Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Our beautiful Earth...
     
  16. Pisa

    Pisa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    4,157
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I was referring to the 275 million rials the Saudis gave Assad in 2011, before the Iranian involvement.
    https://www.mepc.org/journal/saudi-arabias-motives-syrian-civil-war

    Read the article. It's quite enlightening re neocon-ish cahoot-ish blueprint-ish thingy. It clearly shows that there was no prior intention on the part of the Saudis to remove Assad. On the contrary, just like Israel, the Saudis feared that Assad's removal would bring dangerous changes in the regional balance of power.

    Why do I think that my source is more accurate than yours, you ask? Well, keep reading...

    This, like other opinion pieces on the ME, is completely one sided, lacks context, perspective, is full of omissions and outright lies. We're not told that Hezbollah is a terrorist and criminal organization, the attack on the US embassy in Iran, and subsequent hostage situation for more than a year, is miraculously transformed into "US cut ties with Iran" (just for kicks, apparently), Iran is presented as a passive actor, all the complexities of the Middle East are reduced to supposedly Saudi-led Sunnis vs. Shia. This worthless garbage is a shining example of extremely dangerous hateful anti-American propaganda.

    So what?

    So what?

    Nope. Neither Israel, nor Saudi Arabia had plans to remove Assad. Big changes are very dangerous in the region. Easier to deal with the evil we know.

    I'm not impressed. It's a one man crusade against Hillary Clinton.

    Jeffrey Sachs might be a great thinker in his field - economics. Better stay out of geopolitics.

    Most articles on the US policy in the Middle East - Sachs' included - are very one sided. The authors only look at the US, often twisting statements and overlooking facts that don't fit the narrative. The other side is always considered a victim, proof to the contrary is ignored. Even if part of their content is true, the overall message is a lie.

    Let's look at an example.
    Fact: "The young assistant, her boss and his wife were seen leaving the hotel late at night".
    Reporting: "The young assistant and her boss were seen leaving the hotel late at night".

    Technically, the reporting is not a lie, but the overall message is a lie. It's called lying by omission, and this is what the one sided articles do. The article about the young assistant and her boss (yes, it's real) was an eye opener.

    I always ask myself what had been left out by the author of an article. Context and perspective about all sides involved increase the reliability of the information in the article, and give the reader the necessary tools to reach the right conclusion.
     
  17. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    6,504
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I had already read that report while looking over the issue of Saudi-Syrian relations. Except for the fact that you cherry-pick and try to emphasize one part of the contradictory elements within the Saudi policy covered in that report, the overall report isn't entirely baseless nor in opposite of what I have said despite its clear bias if you read even that report in context. The report you cite clearly lays out how the pressures being put on Assad for his support and ties to Iran/Hezbollah. And while I have already said that several parties (led by the French, and supported by the Saudis) were willing to give Assad an "out" if he broke relations with Iran, he didn't and the policies to destablize his regime continued. Some excerpts from your own report, relevant not to leverage part, but the part about working to destablize Assad (which was part of the open campaign of sanctions and the covert intelligence activities against Assad by the CIA and many others, including the Saudis):

    This is the backdrop to Seymour Hersh's report on the Redirection and it not only doesn't contradict what he had to say, but provides additional details to supplement it.

    As for what the Saudis were doing in 2011 at the time of the Syrian civil war, Assad has already talked about it directly. They were showing him an 'olive branch' through some aid (that they would cut off), but then place their demand on him: cut ties with Iran.

    In any case, I am not going to deal with your attack on Seymour Hersh, who was (before getting totally blacklisted by the pro Israel lobby and ending up marginalized) a well respected, Pulitzer winning, journalist. Who, incidentally, happens to be Jewish, which of course is not a defense against the ridiculous anti-Semite charge by the neo-Nazi Zionists you seem to be listening to.
    When a side is put under "isolation", under "economic sanctions", and is facing overt and covert attempts to destablize its regime, and is told to cut ties with Iran/Hezbollah for a change in those policies, I don't get the "so what" question? You can claim that those policies were "justified", but the purpose of those policies was to unravel Syria and to cause problems for it. If you believe those policies are justified, that is one thing, but you can't distance yourself from their intended consequences of those policies!

    As for Jeffrey Sachs, there are many people who say what he says. But I quote him because he mentions that "as every knowledgeable observers knows" -- meaning that this is not some secret! Unless you think he is "clueless" (ridiculous), or that he is lying (ridiculous), that is the contention that you are left with. That 'everyone" who knows anything about the Syrian civil war, knows the civil war wasn't about Assad (his enemies would have been willing to work with him). It wasn't about "protests". It was about his ties to Iran/Hezbollah.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2019
  18. Dutch

    Dutch Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    46,383
    Likes Received:
    15,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    :applause:
     
    Jazz likes this.
  19. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your interpretation of the statement goes farther than does the statement itself. That is, YOU are adding your own impressiosn to that interpretation.

    Let's start with the FACT that the Israeli military considers Palestinian President Abbas as their key ally in peace, and thus years ago allowed Palestinian security forces more weaponry that was originally the case.

    Let's remember that when Abbas formed his unity government with Gaza, he required today's representation of Gaza to sign documents limiting peace to be accomplished through negotiation and legal means, NOT violence - the path Abbas has followed throughout his long presidency.

    Your suggestion of violence is just plan BS.

    Israel is occupying a large percent of Palestine.

    And, the idea that Palestine would give up on that land, the best land of Palestine, forever fragmenting Palestine into multiple tiny islands, for a RAILROAD is about as stupid as one could POSSIBLY get.
     
    Jazz likes this.
  20. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's a TOTAL joke.

    Israel has demanded that they be allowed to continue ethnic cleansing operations DURING negotiations for borders!!!

    Beyond that, Netanyahu has stated that there will NEVER be a negotiated solution during his leadership. And, he wins elections on that.

    Going back to Roman times is NEVER an argument in redrawing political boundaries. Beyond that, redrawing boundaries is NEVER an excuse for ethnic cleansing - which is what Israel is doing in West Bank.
     
    Jazz likes this.
  21. Jazz

    Jazz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    7,114
    Likes Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Trump: Netanyahu Must Pay Millions in Aid to Palestinians

    US President Donald Trump has reportedly told his close assistants that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should pay millions of dollars in annual aid to the Palestinian Authority if he thinks Washington’s decision to cut it altogether was wrong.


    Trump has cut all aid to the Palestinians since last January.

    Netanyahu had earlier this year asked the White House to resume transferring money to the Palestinian authority, citing concerns by Israeli experts that not doing so would affect the future of any attempts at “peace.”

    Read the details here:
    https://www.albawaba.com/news/trump-netanyahu-must-pay-millions-aid-palestinians-1319927
    ------
    Yes, if the "IF" wasn't there, that would be an applaudable statement!
     
  22. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    7,695
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I love this UN "inalienable right" the Arabs have of returning to their homelands.
    My family was driven out of Ireland ca 1640 by Cromwell - we had HUGE estates
    and lost the lot.
    We migrated through Alabama, George, Mississippi and Texas. We lost all our
    lands during the Civil War and wound up in Australia.
    I want all that back, inalienable right.
    No chance of that. Just as there's no chance the 480,000 Jewish refugees driven
    out of African and Arab nations after 1948 have any right of return.

    The difference is the Arabs who lived in what was Jordanian, Egyptian and Turkish
    land DEMAND this "right" and receive attention from the Arab world (who for the most
    part won't accept Palestinians.) And they are backed by anti-Semites and the political
    Left.


    Israel does not accept "right of return"
    https://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignp...inian refugees have a right to return to.aspx

    But the Israeli govt has stated it is open to the concept if it's a part of the final peace
    process with the Arab nations. The rationale is the number one thing for the Jewish
    state is permanent security and recognition - any right of return has to begin right here.
    Some Jews hope the Arabs will come around to this, some cynically hope it will never
    happen. It's the end of Israel if it does - the Jews in Palestine will, one again, just be
    guests in someone else's nation - and whatever that implies.
     
    Thedimon likes this.
  23. Poohbear

    Poohbear Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2018
    Messages:
    7,695
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The railroad was for Gaza - and Gaza is one contiguous chunk of land.
    The offer was for this land:
    1 - to be open border with Israel
    2 - to be extended via the Negev.

    And the West Bank under Oslo would be 97% returned, and with the
    remaining coming from Israel itself. It's not a good deal, but it's a deal.
    The Jews were offered land in Palestine under the UN, but this land
    did not include Jerusalem, the temple or the old biblical towns that were
    so much a part of Israel, ie Bethlehem, Jericho, Shiloh etc..
    ISRAEL ACCEPTED WHAT THEY FELT WAS A FLAWED DEAL. A
    BAD DEAL TO A JEW IS BETTER THAN NO DEAL.
    ARABS NEED TO THINK IN THE SAME WAY.
     
  24. Pisa

    Pisa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    4,157
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Why not true? Because you say so?

    Jews have always lived in Palestine, in places like Jerusalem, Safed, Hebron, Gaza, Jaffa..

    Jews in Hebron were robbed, beaten, raped and killed by Ottoman soldiers in 1517 (the descendants of that community were attacked by Arabs in 1929, with the survivors forced to leave their homes by the British).

    Google Sabbatai Zevi and Nathan of Gaza, 17th century.

    Napoleon's army massacred Jews in Gaza in the 18th century (by the way, Albanian Muslims defended the fortress of Jaffa, not Arabs).

    Early 19th century. Jews were the majority in Jerusalem.

    1834. Sunday June 15. The beginning of a month-long attack on the Jewish community of Safed. Jews robbed, killed, raped.

    The BDS teachings are propaganda tools, not historically accurate narratives.

    This is as far as I'm willing to support your slanderous attacks. I am a Zionist myself. Please refrain from ad-hominem.

    Source for Jews fighting on the side of Arabs against other Jews?

    I don't understand why you're so sure that Arabs in Palestine during the mandate were descendants of Arabs who supposedly have lived in Palestine for generations from time immemorial. Proof, please.

    Contrary to BDS teachings, there were MENA Jews in Palestine. Like the Yemeni community in Silwan, almost wiped out by Arabs. Survivors were forced to relocate by the British. Silwan is thought of today as pure Arab from time immemorial.

    Everything in this post is false.

    Before WWI Jews were not seen as Europeans. They were told to go back to Palestine. Now, that Jews are in Palestine, they are accused of being white Europeans who don't belong in the Middle East. Jews are told to get out of Palestine. When are you people going to make up your collective mind?

    Ad hominem again. Yay.

    The author is suggesting in the title that Zionists are not really Jews. Why would anyone expect a fair and balanced rendering of historical truth from a book with such a skewed title?
     
  25. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    18,965
    Likes Received:
    3,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Trump is correct. As an Occupying Power Israel has responsibility for the care of the Palestinians and should be providing such. I think it was at Oslo the US decided to take over doing this until the final resolution which never came as it was never intended as this is a not yet completed colonial project. Instead of providing for the people it has kept prisoner for over 50 years, as well as taking their land and water resources, Israel misuses terms of Oslo to hold Palestinians money - $10 million a month. But that is colonial powers for you.
     
    Thingamabob and Jazz like this.

Share This Page