It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: redbackd
When the UN allowed Israelis to move into Palestine in 1948, the Israelis started to take over claiming it was their land in the first place...but was it? and if they can take over in 75 years what does that mean for countries where the original inhabitants should possibly take back their land?
originally posted by: redbackd
When the UN allowed Israelis to move into Palestine in 1948, the Israelis started to take over claiming it was their land in the first place...but was it? and if they can take over in 75 years what does that mean for countries where the original inhabitants should possibly take back their land?
originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn
You are sourcing Al Jaz for something like this. Seriously?
It really is that simple, as far as I can see... in definition. The left and anti-semites have complicated the issue by changing definitions AGAIN, and spinning like a top with a mad toddler yanking a string.
Tell me what you believe should be added to the definition of Zionist? You seem far more knowledgable than I.
originally posted by: Kontars
originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn
You are sourcing Al Jaz for something like this. Seriously?
It really is that simple, as far as I can see... in definition. The left and anti-semites have complicated the issue by changing definitions AGAIN, and spinning like a top with a mad toddler yanking a string.
Tell me what you believe should be added to the definition of Zionist? You seem far more knowledgable than I.
Zionism is an international organization that crosses borders without regard to nationality, race or religion. They only care about their own collective personal interests. For example president Biden is a Zionist, he keep the borders open for cheap potentially criminal labor without any regard to social integrity of the US.
originally posted by: Kontars
a reply to: DBCowboy
That's the book definition, but I was speaking from practical perspective. What they state might be true, but I'm describing how they act. If we would add the book definition, we would say their slogan shall be "Israel First".
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: Kontars
a reply to: DBCowboy
That's the book definition, but I was speaking from practical perspective. What they state might be true, but I'm describing how they act. If we would add the book definition, we would say their slogan shall be "Israel First".
Kinda like "America First" for Americans.
It's called nationalism and it's not a bad thing.
originally posted by: Kontars
originally posted by: DBCowboy
originally posted by: Kontars
a reply to: DBCowboy
That's the book definition, but I was speaking from practical perspective. What they state might be true, but I'm describing how they act. If we would add the book definition, we would say their slogan shall be "Israel First".
Kinda like "America First" for Americans.
It's called nationalism and it's not a bad thing.
Yup, it's not a bad thing. The issue is when there is conflict of interests and when that happens, the American citizen becomes a second class citizen and less of a priority.
originally posted by: Spacehead1111
Let me tell you something.
There's a difference between Palestinians, and Hamas/ISIS etc..
It's funny whenever you know no difference, and you don't know better. ISIS is a combination of US and Israeli intelligent agencies.
Funny how we call those who advocate for peace TERRORISTS.
Are you #ting me? The fact you pick sides is crazy, both sides want peace. In case you haven't been paying attention.
originally posted by: redbackd
When the UN allowed Israelis to move into Palestine in 1948, the Israelis started to take over claiming it was their land in the first place...but was it? and if they can take over in 75 years what does that mean for countries where the original inhabitants should possibly take back their land?