The word "Zionist" itself is an insult. It reminds people of apartheid, racist regime.
Apparently, it is a matter of perspective. For me Zionism is a noble cause, one of the justest national-liberation movements in the world. Paraphrasing your own statement, I would be a Zionist supporter even if I weren't a Jew or an Israeli.
Anti-Zionism, on the other hand, is an abomination and a sign of moral bankruptcy.
It is one thing to call a place holy for a religion, but it is another to throw the original people of that area out of their homes. This is not called "liberation". This is called "occupation".
What original people? You mean the Jews of Jerusalem who were a majority there and who were all thrown out of there in 1948? Yes, the old city of Jerusalem fell under Jordanian occupation in 1948 and was liberated in 1967.
In your case, if you think that place is holy for Jews then what are you, an atheist, doing there? *How can you claim to "liberate" the place when you don't believe in those stories about some god giving land to his "chosen" people in the first place? *
Doing where? In Jerusalem? I don't live in Jerusalem. If you mean the Land of Israel in general and its significance for the Jewish people, then I can repeat it again, in completely non-religious terms "The Land of Israel is the cradle of the Jewish people, the place were the Jewish identity was born and the Jewish nation came to be."
I've never mentioned anything about the "promised land". It's only you who constantly bring it up and accuse me of using this argument, which in reality I've never used.
Problem is that you Zionist fascists do not recognize Islam's claim at all. That is where the problem lies.
Really? If you compare the treatment of the religious sites, Muslim and Jewish, under the Muslim/Arab rule vs the Zionist rule , you'll find that the former was horrendous compared to the latter.
Where did I ignore its significance to Jews?
Where did you acknowledge its significance, either religious or secular, to the Jews? You keep repeating that it's holy for the Muslims and therefore must be under the Muslim rule, its significance to all other people and religions notwithstanding.
Islam is not a monolithic religion. There are thousands of opinions and tens of sects. So what's the point?
The point is that your claim that Islam requires one to be anti-Israel and anti-Zionist is nothing but BS.
The fact that you see no rational or even moral issues in systematically expelling an entire people from the land they had inhabited for time immemorial just demonstrated your own level or moral bankruptcy. That is repugnant and vile act, no matter who commits it.
There was no "systematic expulsion". The expulsion was a one time event and it happened when the situation deteriorated to the war of "expel or be expelled". I do agree that any expulsion of that sort is disaster. But I also stipulate that the Jews tried to avoid this scenario all along and resorted to expulsion only when it became clear that the only alternative was their own expulsion.
You are also inaccurate when you say "expelling an entire people". First, because many Palestinian Arabs were not expelled and remained in Israel. Second, because the Palestinian people is a relatively recent formation. At that time the portion of Levantene Arabs who lived in what would become Israel were not "an entire people" of any kind. They have become a people with a distinct national identity as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
And finally, "time immemorial" is also very inaccurate. The Jews were not the only ones who migrated to Palestine. The Arabs were also coming in. In fact, during the 50 years of the Zionist immigration to Palestine, the Arab population of Palestine increased by approx. 3 folds -- from ~450,000 to 1.3 millions. So, 2/3 of the Arabs living in Palestine in 1948 did not live their longer than the Zionist Jews.
Have Muslims formed organizations with the sole, explicitly expressed purpose to purchase land and foster illegal immigration to France or Belgium, with the ultimate goal of building up a demographic majority and establishing an Islamic state? Have Muslims cooked up an entire political ideology claiming a long lost homeland in the Netherlands?
Let's leave the goals of political Islam aside. It is a different topic. I also don't want to speculate about what is going to happen in those areas of Europe where the Muslim immigrants eventually reach the demographic majority, purposefully or not.
My point is that your arguments of the right to resist uncontrolled immigration of "foreigners" who pose a demographic threat are very popular among the Western right. They looked as they were taken verbatim from their writings.
Regrading the question of the demographic threat itself, I'm not sure what is more real. The Muslim immigrants created multiple enclaves throughout Western Europe, mostly in major cities. In some of these enclaves they have become a dominant population, in others they make up a very large minority. The percentage of Muslims of the total European population is still low.
The Jews created a single enclave in the Arab Middle East, where they intended to create a demographic majority. They had no aspirations to the lands beyond the limits of that enclave. The territory of the enclave was very small compared to the total Arab Middle East. The percentage of the Jews out of the total Arab Middle Eastern population was also low. As I wrote in another post, even the devoted Arab nationalist Emir Faisal wrote that the Jewish aspirations were moderate and just.
Perhaps the reason people speak of illegal Israeli settlements and Arab refugees is because of the gross numerical asymmetry of it all - the '48 war resulted in the expulsion of 750,000 Arab civilians. On the other hand, there were fewer than 10,000 Jews in the entire proposed Arab state before 1948 (much of which ended up in Israel anyways). Today there are over 350,000 illegal settlers in the West Bank alone. I haven't seen any estimates of the number of Jews expelled from East Jerusalem (which, as I understand, was mostly comprised of the Arab dominated areas of the city anyways) - and even though the number was without a doubt a small fraction of the number of Palestinians expelled from Israeli territory, it was a war crime nonetheless.
Well, we were talking about the city of Jerusalem, but if you want to expand the area, no problem. Let's also take into account 900,000 Jewish refugees who fled the Arab and Muslim countries in the aftermath of the 1948 war. You may argue that Israel benefited from their arrival and that most of them were planning eventual immigration to Israel as good Zionists anyway. But they definitely did not plan to be expelled and having to flee leaving all their property behind. Was it a war crime? Are they entitled to the proper compensation?
I see. So according to you the British were the legitimate authority in the region when they agreed to create a Jewish state (something you yourself have argued in the past), but were illegal occupiers when they restricted Jewish immigration. What convenient logic!
When the British agreed to the idea of the Jewish homeland in 1918, it made things easier for the Jewish, at least temporarily. Beyond that, their agreement had no other significance.
Incorrect. This was not immigration and dispossession. The native peoples of the Middle East and North Africa were gradually Arabized after being ruled over by an Arabic-speaking elite (who were themselves, generally speaking, not originally from the Arabian peninsula) for centuries.
If you are interested in the question of forceful Arabization, you can ask the Kurds, the Berbers of Northern Africa, or the people of Darfur.
land with sporadic tribal settlements, and with no formal concept of nation-states,
It is actually a very good description of the Arab Middle East in the beg. 20th century.
There was no "systematic expulsion". T*he expulsion was a one time event* and it happened when the situation deteriorated to the war of "expel or be expelled".
100% false.
The exodus of 1948 was only the first stage in the ethnic cleansing of Israel, with the expulsion of an estimated 750,000 Palestinians. Then, during the early 1950's, Israeli government expelled the Arab residents of villages along the cease fire lines and the Lebanese border, killing a few thousand civilians and exiling another 50,000 or so Palestinians and Bedouins. Following the 1967 war, with the demolition of dozens of villages and refugee camps, another 300,000 Palestinians were expelled. This was systematic ethnic cleansing, period.
But I also stipulate that the Jews tried to avoid this scenario all along and resorted to expulsion only when it became clear that the only alternative was their own expulsion.
And as I have already repeatedly pointed out, even within the parameters of the UN partition plans, Arabs would have formed too much of a demographic block to form a "Jewish state," not to mention the fact that they would have controlled most of the state's land. If not expulsion, the Zionist government would have had to disenfranchise its Arab citizens and forcefully strip them of their property at the very least.
Nor do I buy the argument that the Bedouins and villagers who were massacred and expelled were plotting to expel the Jews themselves. That was perhaps the goal of the Arab armies, and could be used as justification for fighting them. But the wholesale ethnic cleansing of Arab civilians was and remains an unjustifiable war crime.
My point is that your arguments of the right to resist uncontrolled immigration of "foreigners" who pose a demographic threat are very popular among the Western right. They looked as they were taken verbatim from their writings.
Like I said, unlike with the Zionists, you have absolutely no proof that there is an organized movement to promote illegal Muslim immigration to any enclave within Europe with the intention of creating a "Muslim state," making your analogy asinine.
As for my statements about immigration, as I already pointed out, most European nations already have strict immigration laws to prevent an influx of Arab/Muslim immigrants, and I don't think anyone denies the fact that nations have the right to restrict outside immigration as they see fit.
Well, we were talking about the city of Jerusalem, but if you want to expand the area, no problem. Let's also take into account 900,000 Jewish refugees who fled the Arab and Muslim countries in the aftermath of the 1948 war. You may argue that Israel benefited from their arrival and that most of them were planning eventual immigration to Israel as good Zionists anyway. But they definitely did not plan to be expelled and having to flee leaving all their property behind. Was it a war crime? Are they entitled to the proper compensation?
If you are interested in the question of forceful Arabization, you can ask the Kurds, the Berbers of Northern Africa, or the people of Darfur.
A completely irrelevant point made by someone who's orginal argument has already been proven as ridiculous. You originally tried to claim that the spread of Arabic beyond the Arabian Peninsula was evidence of migration of an outside population with the subsequent dispossetion and displacement of the aboriginal population, and therefore analogous to the creation of Israel. When I correctly pointed out that this was patently false, and that the phenomenon you speak of was the result of the gradual Arabization of the native peoples of the Middle East, you bring up this utterly irrelevant point.
It is actually a very good description of the Arab Middle East in the beg. 20th century.
Again, your imperialistic arrogance is truly breathtaking.
The Arab Middle East had a long history of organized govenment going back centuries, if not millennia in some areas. We're talking about the birthplace of written law; your attempts to undermine the validity of Middle Eastern civil society are yet another pathetic attempt at ethnic cleansing apologetics.
Yeah. “Noble cause”. Zionism is considered “noble” only by racist fascist apartheid supporters like you.
South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu has accused Israel of practising apartheid in its policies towards the Palestinians.
The Nobel peace laureate said he was “very deeply distressed” by a visit to the Holy Land, adding that “it reminded me so much of what happened to us black people in South Africa”.
“Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pinochet, Milosevic, and Idi Amin were all powerful,** but in the end they bit the dust**,” he said.
Canadian analyst, Professor Michel Chossudovsky from the University of Ottawa has revealed that Operation “Cast Lead” is in fact the legacy of :
"a broader military-intelligence agenda first formulated by the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2001**, aiming to produce a planned humanitarian disaster, designed to inflict mass civilian casualties and terror** - that is, to weaken resistance, increase Israeli control, and encourage Palestinian emigration. Contrary to Israeli official rhetoric, military targets are secondary to this principal objective. "
If your support would not be based on religious claims then what would be the basis?
Why?
People who had been living there continuously for thousands of years.
Those are old stories which are told only by religions. Scientifically, Jews are as much of a nation today as Khazars would be, or people like Spartans.
“Jewish” nation was based on religious fraud and story-telling.
This is why being an atheist, you can not talk about “liberation” of people when they don’t exist anymore.
All that we have in the name of “Jewish” people in Palestine is occupiers from various parts of the world who have nothing in common except religion.
And what does this statement above has to do with my saying that Zionist fascists don’t accept Islam’s claim on that land?
Why would I say something when it has not come under discussion in the first place?
And where did YOU acknowledge significance of that land to Muslims? Why are you asking me to do something when you yourself are not doing it?
People from all religion should be allowed unhindered access to their holy sites. But that does not mean creating an apartheid regime that recognizes only one religion and race to be the masters. What is needed is a truly democratic state which does not distinguish between different religions and races.
And this means the end of the Zionist racism.
If Islam requires it then what are those Jews doing opposing and abusing/cursing Zionists like you?
Re: Cowardly Idf Soldiers, amazing clip
I not only read news articles but I put special emphasis on comments posted by common people. I am encouraged to see more and more people around the world seeing the recognizing the true ugly face of Zionist regime and its supporters.
As much as moral retards from Zionist regime try, the injustices committed to the people of that land are going to come to an end soon. That would be the day when the guilty will be punished.
First, the Jews would be still a majority, albeit a small one. Second, there is always a way to make things work peacefully if both sides are willing to do so. After all, the plan was specifically about partition of the land into a Jewish and an Arab state. For example, the Arab population could have become citizens of the Arab state and permanent residents of Israel. These way they would execute their political and national rights in the state of their people, but retain all the property rights at the place of their residents in Israel. Another solution would be a special provision that would make the “Arab” and "Jewish"status of the states “a founding principle” which cannot be eliminated by simple voting.
All this would obviously take a willingness to compromise and a partition agreement between both parties involved.
Regarding the land property, it is incorrect to say that the Arabs would control most of the state’s land. True, most of the land that was privately owned belonged to the Arab owners. However, this was not most of state’s land. In fact, most of the state’s land was not privately owned by anyone.
Unfortunately, this is exactly what usually happens when two mutually hostile populations are at each other throats. Israeli/Palestine situation is just another example out of many more, again unfortunately.
Why illegal? Perfectly legal immigration. Just like the Jewish and Arab immigration to the Palestine geographical region was perfectly legal.
Thanks. They don’t want back. But proper compensation for the lost property would be nice.
I agree that many of them objected the title of “a refugee”. They did not want to create an appearance of not wanting to be in Israel. Nevertheless, they were, by all means, refugees who ended up completely dispossessed and living in refugee camps in Israel. Of course, Israel has made an effort to get them out of the camps and succeeded. This is unlike the Arab governments who chose to keep the Palestinian refugees in the camps and perpetuate their misery for political gains.
These are images of the Jewish refugee camps in ~ 1949-52.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/he/thumb/8/8d/TALPIOT_MAABARAH.jpg/250px-TALPIOT_MAABARAH.jpg
You original point was that the different attitudes toward the Arab and the Jewish refugees are due to the assymetry in numbers. Well, you are wrong. The conflict created comparable numbers of the refugees on both sides.
Yes, the Arabs came to the new lands and “gradually” arabized the locals by making them understand that they’d better accept the new ways of life if they want to continue living there… or just living. Unfortunately, most of those who weren’t compliant enough are no longer here to complain.
I wonder, are your “imperialistic” labels specifically reserved for people whose skin color is assumed to be lighter than yours?
I’m fully aware of the history of the Middle East. There were many great civilizations here. The Sumerian civilization, which created the first written law, was one of them. That civilization, however, has been long long gone. The Jewish civilization is another example. That one has also contributed greatly to the written law business. Fortunately, this civilization is still here 
Those have nothing to do with the Arabs though. The Arab civilization flourished their later and also contributed greatly to the human cultural heritage.
However, as it happens in history, civilizations rise and fall, and by the end of 19th century, the condition of the Arab Middle East was exactly as you so eloquently stated - “sporadic tribal settlements, and with no formal concept of nation-states”.
BTW, the American continent also hosted great nations and civilizations - for example, the Aztec, the Maya or Inca empire. How imperialistic of you to imply that native Americans were uncivilized!!!
No. This is history told by science. The fact that you knowledge of history is limited to what you could read from holy books is your your personal problem, of course. However, ignorance is a very poor excuse for bigotry.
The fact that in order to make your point you, and other anti-Zionist of this kind, have to resort to falsification of history and other acts of intellectual dishonesty only proves that there is neither truth nor justice on your side. Nothing but self-righteous bigotry, inflated by religious zeal.
Zionists very much accept Islam’s claims. In fact, the Muslim holy sites under the Zionist rule are protected and accessible for Muslims. (Which was not the case for the Jewish sites under the Muslim rule).
This is just great. If I’m not mistaken, psychologists call it “projection”
Look it up.
Like the Islamic Republic of Pakistan?
Re: Cowardly Idf Soldiers, amazing clip
Ah, so your first suggestion would be to strip them of their citizenship rights period, which would have simply set them up for expulsion at a latter date. Thank you for proving my point.
And that would essentially involve disenfranchisement. Like I said, there was no democratic way to leave the Arabs in place and remain a “Jewish” state.
As of 1945, public properties only accounted for the majority of the land in 1 district in the entire British Mandate (Beersheba). Arabs owned a clear majority of the land in most other districts, and were the single largest land-owning group in every other district.
Source:
They’ve already been offered more than the Zionists have been willing to offer Palestinian refugees.
Many of their leaders rejected the title of “refugees” specifically at the time that the Israeli government was attempting to get international recognition for their alleged refugee status and demand compensation from Arab governments.
The systematic expulsion of the Palestinians is fundamentally different from the migration of Middle Eastern Jews. No Palestinians left by choice because they wanted to seek out a new homeland in Lebanon or Jordan, nor has Israel offered them the right to claim Israeli citizenship and reclaim lost properties. Many Mizrahim, on the other hand, actively claim that they immigrated to Israel out of Zionist fervor, and have been offered the right of return by many of their original homelands. Perhaps most importantly, unlike the Palestinians, outside of a few isolated examples there was no official government campaign to expel the Mizrahim.
Also, why do the Palestinians bear collective responsibility for the actions of outside Arab states? Because they happen to speak Arabic as well? That’s the same vile, malignant logic that Arab mobs used when they were starting pogroms against Middle Eastern Jews.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, your grasp of Middle Eastern history is very weak and/or poisoned by your fundamentally bigoted political ideologies. The Arablization of the Middle East took place over centuries (it wasn’t till the Abbasid era that local governments in outlying provinces were even transitioned to Arabic), and was, with a few exceptions, primarily the result of local populations realizing that it was politically and socially expedient to learn the language of government and administration. Were it a rapid forced process as your revisionist Zionist textbooks must claim, then Iran (which was fully conquered by the Arabs within a decade of the death of the Prophet Mohammed) would likely be speaking Arabic today.
In any case, it’s nice to see you veering off into completely irrelevent tangents (even after their irrelevance has been pointed out to you), for the sole purpose of spreading largely false/exaggerated anti-Arab propaganda.
Frankly, I probably look more stereotypically “European” than you do. The label refers to your quasi-colonial attitude towards the Arabs; I have no qualms about using the term for people with darker skin than my own.
At the end of the 19th century, the Levant was still ruled over by the Ottoman Empire. The lands that currently comprise Israel and the Occupied Territories were, for the most part, included in the Ottoman Vilayet of Jerusalem. Although admittedly in their decline, the Ottomans still presided over a sophisticated bureaucratic state; to claim that they lacked organized government is just your quasi-colonial hubris rearing its ugly head yet again.
I said that the American continents were mostly comprised of areas without organized governments; a statement I still stand by. I am fully aware of the existence of a handful of Native American empires in South & Central Americas, primarily in the areas colonized by the Spanish. I also believe I clearly pointed out that historians in the Americas today believe that the destruction and ethnic cleansing of the native civilizations of the Americas was a heinous and egrigious criminal act. In distinct contrast to the Zionists, you’ll find few apologists for those massacres here. I believe I also pointed out that all of these nations ultimately offered the descendants of those colonized peoples full citizenship rights, even in those South/Central American states where it meant that they would demographically overwhelm the white descendants of European colonists and in essence take control of the government. Frankly, we wouldn’t be having this discussion right now if the Palestinians had the right to equal citizenship in a secular bi-national state today, but I know that will not happen as it would defy the fundamentally bigoted foundations of the Israeli state.
I believe I also pointed out that if you wanted to use the dominant mores of the middle ages and the colonial era to rationalize Israel’s actions today, then you shouldn’t complain when people compare you to imperialistic barbarians.
...... I've said it before and I'll say it again, your grasp of Middle Eastern history is very weak and/or poisoned by your fundamentally bigoted political ideologies. ...
At the end of the 19th century, the Levant was still ruled over by the Ottoman Empire. The lands that currently comprise Israel and the Occupied Territories were, for the most part, included in the Ottoman Vilayet of Jerusalem. ..
JeA, Before you accuse others of being "poisoned", have you made sure that you are not suffering from similar poison?
Palis and ARabs created fasad aka terror against Ottomans too. and as a result Ottoman army was in constant hot pursuit of P's and A's terrorists just like Pak army these days is in hot pursuit of TTP, Qaida and other muj.
Thanks to P's and A's, the whole trans-Jordan and Saudi areas didn't have strong defense that could have been offered by the Ottoman empire.
Lacking that strong defense the area was ripe for pickin' by anyone with good enough army.
So blame the P's and A's for destroying their own Muslim armies, and then as a result getting pummeled by the new arrivals.
In this world, either you develop good defenses using your own "modern armies", or allow some other army to come in.
But do whatever you do, never ever rely on pure Jihadism, and terror. Because it destroys you first before damaging anyone else.
There are a lot of parallels between terrorist in FATA and Palis. And see how both of them are getting whooped.
Anyone who wants to avoid whooping, should learn a lesson and DO NOT DO what Palis have been doing for the last 60+ years and do not do what Muj are doing in FATA and Pak.
Re: Cowardly Idf Soldiers, amazing clip
JeA, Before you accuse others of being "poisoned", have you made sure that you are not suffering from similar poison?
Palis and ARabs created fasad aka terror against Ottomans too. and as a result Ottoman army was in constant hot pursuit of P's and A's terrorists just like Pak army these days is in hot pursuit of TTP, Qaida and other muj.
If you're referring to the Arab Revolt during WWI, that was primarily lead by the Sheriff of Mecca and his followers in the Arabian Peninsula. The British conquered what is now Israel and the Occupied Territories mostly on their own (with an army full of the same Punjabis and Pathans who now comprise the bulk of Pakistan's armed forces, BTW), with some assistance from the Egyptians. Unlike in the Arabian peninsula, there isn't too much evidence of local involvement with the British in Palestine during the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire.
And even if they had participated with the British, I fail to see how that would rationalize their complete dispossesion and expulsion from their homeland?
I know it's become rather fashionable to support Israel among a certain subset of seculaist Pakistani elites - I suppose it's part of the package of unquestioningly idolizing Ataturk. But come on...I'm sure there's a way to support secular democracy in Pakistan without rationalizing war crimes.
No. This is history told by science.
Jews are as much of a race as Greek are Spartans.
[quote]
The fact that in order to make your point you, and other anti-Zionist of this kind, have to resort to falsification of history and other acts of intellectual dishonesty only proves that there is neither truth nor justice on your side. Nothing but self-righteous bigotry, inflated by religious zeal.
[/quote]
haha. Just words. Yeah, and monkeys fly too.
Zionism is nothing but racism in the name of religion.
[quote]
Zionists very much accept Islam's claims. In fact, the Muslim holy sites under the Zionist rule are protected and accessible for Muslims. (Which was not the case for the Jewish sites under the Muslim rule).
[/quote]
The whole land is holy for Islam, not just some religious sites. Just like the land of Hejaz.
[quote]
Like the Islamic Republic of Pakistan?
[/QUOTE]
We can talk about Pakistan, but I see you are trying to divert the attention from what I said about a state which takes care of all its citizens EQUALLY.
So I repeat again: What is needed is a truly democratic state which does not distinguish between different religions and races.
What objection do you have in principle about it?
Re: Cowardly Idf Soldiers, amazing clip
Alex sehooni:
[quote]
What original people? You mean the Jews of Jerusalem who were a majority there and who were all thrown out of there in 1948?
[/quote]
Where were the people who were "thrown out" before 1948?
burqa:
[quote]
So blame the P's and A's for destroying their own Muslim armies, and then as a result getting pummeled by the new arrivals.
[/quote]
Even if you blame them, how can you support Zionist fascist apartheid regime of foreign occupiers? What's the connection between the two?
It is like blaming Benazir for her death instead of the person who fired shots only because she came out of her vehicle for a minute.
Greetings GS members,
I am an Israeli-American and have served over 10 years in the IDF. I also work for a couple of Jewish-American organizations in NYC.
I hope you know that the soldiers in that clip are not cowards. You must remember that us Jews view the Goyim (non-Jews) differently, and maybe if we were having a bad day, those women and kids would be shot. Remember, non-Jewish men, women and children are okay for us to kill.
I am also very happy that we have posters like burqaposhx here. It's good to see enlightened Muslims who acknowledge the inferiority of Muslims and the supremacy of Jews.
Burqaposhx is probably the only Muslim I have come across who has hatred for the Palestinians. This exactly the type of values I instill in my children: that the Palestinians are irrational barbarians and the land of Israel belongs to us. I hope we can use burqaposhx for our future PR campaigns when we do implement the "Final Solution" for the Palestinians: Massive deportations to Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt.
I do find it funny that the posters on this board think that the Palestinians are Arabs. Sorry, but only an imbecile would think that. The only true ethnic Arabs are the ones on the Gulf and the Peninsula. The rest are just Arabic-speaking peoples. For example, Iraqis and Jordanians are descendants of Aramaic and Babylonian civilizations mixed with Turkish, Persian and Mongolian blood. Lebanese and Palestinians are descendants of the Phoenicians. Syrians and Egyptians both have very old civilizations and are not ethnically Arabs.
I am surprised that Muslims do not know that the "Arab" armies which spread Islam in early Islamic history had a majority of non-Arab mercenaries.
But it's good that Muslims think that Palestinians are exactly, 100% the same people as those people in Saudi Arabia. It will make our Israeli case even easier for future Palestinian deportations.
Re: Cowardly Idf Soldiers, amazing clip
Yoda:
[quote]
Burqaposhx is probably the only Muslim I have come across who has hatred for the Palestinians.
This exactly the type of values I instill in my children: that the **Palestinians are irrational barbarians **and the land of Israel belongs to us.
[/quote]
A state based on hatred and bigotry is doomed to "vanish from the page of time".
... I know it's become rather fashionable to support Israel among a certain subset of seculaist Pakistani elites - I suppose it's part of the package of unquestioningly idolizing Ataturk. ....
Who gives a hoot to Ata or Israel or the Palis.
The whole idea is to point the summun bukmun Pakistanis that please calm down.
You the Paks can't take care of your own country and yet you have a self-Ishtyled thakey-dari for the Palis.
Let Palis do their $hite, and let Israeli handle that $hite.
Who are we to go do Panga 1000s of miles away when we can't clean our own $hite and our own messes.
So please refrain from doing this secular shalacular ata turki topi-drama. This is just sloganeering, drama-bazi, patang-bazi, kabooter-bazi, bater-bazi, and in case of Mullahs, the Munda-bazi.
.....I fail to see how that would rationalize their complete dispossesion and expulsion from their homeland? ....
JeA,
Tribals lose their land when they mess with better equipped armies from the civilized and industrially advanced nations. Palis had a chance perhaps had they supported Ottomans or better yet, they themselves had evolved and become civilzed and industrialized and built up their own army before WWI. But they didn't. They continued living like those stuck in 5th century.
And guess what, when big powers came knocking, the lesser developed people lost. This is kind of darwinian principle akin to survival of the fittest.
No one can justify dispossession of tribals in America, Australia, Africa, and the Middle East. But no one can protect the tribals either.
Are you going to find the Apache Indians and get them to the White house? Have you ever visited an Indian reservation. You say you got "educated" in America, then did you ever try to learn the history of that country? or education just means getting a degree and showing up in behs about one issue or the other.
Will you go around Australia and bring the aborigines to rule the whole of Australia?
Would you go around Sudan and bring the local blacks to rule Khartum?
Why just because the "dispossession" occurred few 100 years ago, doesn't mean it has become legit.
So why this pagal-pun with Israel and Palis? Let them sort out things at their own.
FYI!
Once you lose your land, then make sure that you become industrially developed and civilzed before claiming you rights.
Otherwise it is just begging.
Yoda...
Don't feed the trolls.
He's fake (for future reference, actual Zionists don't compare themselves to the Nazis); there's no need to indulge him by responding to his posts.
**You the Paks **can't take care of your own country and yet you have a self-Ishtyled thakey-dari for the Palis.
And again - I am not Pakistani. Not by birth, not by ethnicity, not by nationality. While I certainly do wish Pakistan the best, taking care of its problems is not my responsibility. You, on the other hand, pretty obviously are Pakistani, so why don't you take your own advice and worry about establishing a functional secular government in your own country rather than trying to show off how cool and liberal you must be by unquestioningly supporting Israel and rationalizing the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.
No one can justify dispossession of tribals in America, Australia, Africa, and the Middle East. But no one can protect the tribals either.
Are you going to find the Apache Indians and get them to the White house...blah, blah, blah
Ugh...go reread my post where I already addressed these issues at length. Unlike the Israelis, Americans (1) fully recognize that what was done to the Native Americans was reprehensible; (2) have given all of those people full citizenship rights. Forget the US and Australia, where people European descent are a majority...democracy even prevailed South & Central America, where in many areas the descendants of the native peoples were the overwhelming majority of the population, and whose enfranchisement and citizenship meant a loss of power for the white descendants of European colonists. Like I said, we wouldn't be having this discussion if Israel was willing to give the Palestinians citizenship in a secular, binational democracy.
Once you lose your land, then make sure that you become industrially developed and civilzed before claiming you rights.
Actually and unfortunately the Palestinians are quite educated. That's why we Israelis must continue to bomb their schools so the next generation is discouraged from education. We must also continue to encourage settlers to intimidate Palestinian children by throwing rocks at them so they will stop going to school.
Don't feed the trolls.
He's fake (for future reference, actual Zionists don't compare themselves to the Nazis); there's no need to indulge him by responding to his posts.
Haha, if we were like the Nazis, we wouldn't have the Palestinian problem. Unfortunately we are too nice to the Palestinians.
..... And again - I am not Pakistani. Not by birth, not by ethnicity, not by nationality. ....
If you are not a Pakistani, then why the heck you are feeding the religious chauvinism on a Pakistani board?
It is hypocrisy of nth degree to say "Pakistan should have secularism shlacu-larism yada yada..", and in the same breath flame the already super-heated frothing-at-their-mouths Pakistani Jihadis.
And if a Pakistani steps in to stop your flaming rituals, you throw accusations of Ata-turki-topi-drama.
We unfortunately have many in our home country who are burning our beautiful country down in the name of distant lands just because people like you spread disinformation and big fat lies that "Islam Khutray main hai".
If you are that much bubbling over for the issue of Z's or P's then go on their boards and flame to your heart's content.
Why we the Paks have to suffer from foreign Jihadis like you.
Bibi- Janay-do. We have plenty of that $hite locally available.