Tension over Hamas Rising

Originally posted by IAF101

I dont see where your source says that the refugees decendents should be allowed to return ?? Or are you confabulating this inorder to prove something that has no case in the first place ??

I really hate to right someone else's battle for them, or indeed jump into someone else's thread, but the only reason those refugees had descendents had children outwith Gaza was because they were denied a right to return after 1949. See links ad naseum above. Hardly seems fair on the kids, does it?

Good to see that people are now being called refugees, which I am presuming implies they were displaced and should now be able to return. Definition:

an individual seeking refuge or asylum; especially : an individual who has left his or her native country and is unwilling or unable to return to it because of persecution or fear of persecution (as because of race, religion, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion)

The rest of this ArchAngel can refute on his own!

TD

[edit on 31-1-2006 by TaupeDragon]

Originally posted by ArchAngel

So the Arab States were not bound by the UN resolution that created Israel, and had every right to take back what was theirs?

How far back are you willing to go?
How many generations?
How many civilisations, countries, states, empires and monarchies are you going to go back through?

Originally posted by TaupeDragon
Anyone, if anyone's unclear, I'm the reasonable one and IAF101 is the guy that thinks arabs breed too much.

Obviously, that is the response of a person desperately trying to validate his position when he's left without anything to add.
Such Histrionics only add to confirm this.

People don't suicide bomb for recreation or amusement. It's abhorrent to me, but at the same time I can understand the reasons.

Again the familiar line of 'I hate yet I love it' ! So what is the word this time? "abhor"?
Sure the only people who support or infact defend terrorist action these days are 'other' terrorists and the world recongnises this as so ,
The Palestinians have tunred car bombing into such an art form that it is hard for the reasonable person to accept it as anything more than the very nature of a people. No excuse however covincing it may seem to the oppressed is excuse enought for terrorism. Such type of "crusader" rhetoric only seeks to perpetuate the violence as they find more and more "stooges" who claim to "understand" them .
Obviously one is always free to choose how one seeks to respond to their misfortunes in any way the see fit. The repurcussions of this however cannot be avaided. The Palestinians know this and want to con the world into believe in some psuedo-oppressed platitudes that the ignorant fall prey to.

I didn't like the IRA very much. They blew up things and people......

How very "eloquently" put
Anyway you banal iteration of IRA history is of little relevance or consequnce to this thread at hand. If anything the meager British response has gauranteed that such acts of desperation shall continue to be carried out in the hope that the rest of the world will be as "tractable" as the British were. However this display of weakness is not endorsed by the righteous. Isreal will not be dictated to by meager desperate men aka Terrorists.

Made me smile. You made a pretty strong statement to the effect that 'I served in the Middle East and I can tell you all about the Arabs and Palestinians in particular.'
So tell.

Apparently in your campaigne to malign the truth you have forgotten that this thread in not the appropriate place to satisfy your curiosity. Unless of course you want to test me ? In any case, a U2U is the proper means for such idle curiosity.

You spent your first post moaning about corrupt dictators looting the country and the lack of arab democracy. You then spent the next post moaning about the fact that the electorate voted for Hamas. So what's your alternative? Would you like to appoint a dictator for them or something?

I distictly remeber the snivelling response you provided about the "oppressed" Palestinians when compared to their sadistic 'masters'. Followed shortly by a long prattle about the "middle ground" that such a problem needs. Apparently the Palestinians do not share your views on 'middle ground'. Thus, we see either a Terrorist organisation come to power or a devious dictatorship in what is supposedly passed off as a "mandate" by the Palestinians.
Pityfull really.

Dunno what sort of people would let a terrorist group stand for elections -
All I can say is that drawing terrorists into a political dialogue seemed to work in Ulster. The results are pretty plain for all to see.

Ah, so some truth at last with the "Dunno" !
The results are that now the inhabitants of Ulster or what ever you want to call North Ireland, have the choice of electing "thugs" into postions of power and legitimize the criminality of their action for all history.
What a shame is what the world says! So many British officers laid to rest by the IRA for what they assumed was their duty against criminals. They certainly will be all the more happy to know that the very people whom they have sacrified their lives for are the people who now them their "representatives". :shk:

1 You stop terrorism by recognizing that terrorism has causes, which is not
to say that you cave in to it. Not sure if the Palestinian refugee thing has been ceded or not by you. Probably not.

Your constant iteration of this mith is not going to make it true. It may be true to you but not to those in the know. Have you conceded to the fact that the Palestinians have displaced themselves due to fear of Jewish reprisals against them during the 1947 war even though this is what your most celebrated source has stated ?? No ?

2 OK. When are you stopping?

3 Do we include extreme Zionist rhetoric and policies here? Sorry.

So when all reason fails I guess their is always histrionics to fall back on isnt there? Why am I not suprised by this ?

4 Start co-operating with the UN concerning the return of refugees.
5 Start making acceptable compromises over the pre-67 status of the
country

Their can be no cooperation that threatens the very exsistence of Israel due to the violence that would erupt yet again all over Israel with the introduction of such belligerant elements.
The UN speaks of letting the refugees return to their homes, their are no homes, as tents dont last more than a month inthe desert. The people who claim to be refugees are not the actual "refugees" but their descendents which is not covered by the UN.
The status now is almost what it was pre-1967. The constant belligerance of Israels neighbours nessesitated the preventive measure to discipline the arabs into accepting peace. These disciplinary measure still are in force today in some areas where their is an elevated propensity towards terrorism.

Define 'giving in'.

Why ? Can you not understand the Phrase ? If you cannot I suggest you go through elementary english grade 4 - 7 should help you.

I'm not saying give in. I said 'understand'. Or possibly acknowledge that there are reasons that people hate other people.

Your are attempting to equivocate your stance further. Compassion is a sentiment that does not exsist towards terrorists any that show a propensity toward exhibiting it show not only a want of charecter but also an all encompassing cowardice in their personality.
A foot in the door is all that is needed for this tuning into the "Arab and the Camel" story. How Ironic that this is especially true for the Palestinians !

Or do you think the Palestinians are voting for extremists because they're a bit bored and have nothing better to do that riot and smuggle arms on a Saturday night?

That is also a very probable theory that has been underconsideration by many psychologists who tend to study their behaviour.

I've explained (with links, which is more than you've even tried to do) the situation as best I can, and I'm really not getting anything back in return other than evasion and abuse.

The reason of not bombariding these posts with links has already been said. I do not want to repeate that process again. I have advised you to look up past material on ATS to get all the links you want.
Apparently you seem to be impressed by a few words strung together on any site. IF that is your craving take it somewhere else.
As for the alleged evasion and abuse, I have encountered nothing but petty histrionics and cheap shots in your replies that obviously demean you but also in the process associate me with your infantile urges.

I'm taking your swerve from 'no Palestinians were evicted', to 'well, lots of Jewish people moved to Israel', as a *tacit* admission that morally questionable things were done in the foundation of the state.

I suggest that you take no such liberty, if you choose to do so it would be your folly as I have admitted to any Palestinian forced evictions. What I was trying to explain, unsucessfully it would seem, is that the real refugees are the Jews and not the Palestinians all along. The Palestinans "fled" due to "fear" while the Jews were "forced" to relocate. This is yet again form YOUR sources. To deny this would be to say that your sources are wrong and all that you seek to establish by brandishing them is all incorrect.

1 I'm a member of a Jewish Professional Fraternity

Yes, textbook response, as soon as you are caught, you try to associate yourself with some "Jewish" entity/person in order to hang on to any shread of credibility that is left of your argument.
Nice tactic isnt it! not seen it been employed by the more " fresher" crop of members.

2 'Ethnic Cleansing' was a term used by Benny Morris, not me. There are links you know. I even posted them. He's not what you'd call a bleeding- heart liberal.
What would you like me to call it? 'Holiday Excursion to the scenic Transjordan desert'?

Beny morris is by no way an example or a model to any one, let alone one who wishes to make a credible argument.
Call it by its rightfully name, which is " WAR ".

3 How does acknowledging that there was a violent struggle during the foundation of Israel which damaged a lot of people on both sides make me an anti-semite?

Never called you an Anti-Semite, but stated that you exhibit hate towards the Jews by accusing them wrongfully of "ethnic cleanising" .
It is rather You who has picked up the term, accused me of labeling you and denied it vehmently. Which is suspicious behaviour indeed.

I think you've taught me that your 'Confess Hate' Signature under your Avatar is pretty accurate
What's your worldview? Other than that arabs are inferior beings, obviously.

I would rather confess my hate than mask it as ambivalence and try to deceive and conceal my true intentions by equivocation and histrionics.
I suggest you follow that moto and have the courage to "Confess Hate".
As for my worldview I do not hate the Arabs personally, it is the "devil" inside them right now that I hate.


IAF

Originally posted by TaupeDragon
I really hate to right someone else's battle for them, or indeed jump into someone else's thread,

But somehow you have "condescended" havent you? Such Hipocracy !!

but the only reason those refugees had descendents had children outwith Gaza was because they were denied a right to return after 1949. See links ad naseum above. Hardly seems fair on the kids, does it?

Yeah they had over 50 years to make peace and return but apparently, peace is not an option when cars and bombs are still available in the plenty. It also serves as a marketable skill I would think to their brethren all across the world.
As for the kids, their fate was sealed when the terrorists began strapping their own children with syntex and making them run into Israeli gaurd posts blowing themselves up. So yeah, it doesnt seem fair to the kids.

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
Wouln'nt be great if the factions went at each others throats?

I would Love to see them gunning each other down in the middle of their filthy streets.....I have a feeling they won't dissapoint me.


Maximu§

if i were to say that i hope all the idiot redneck religious extremists should gun each other down, i'd be beaten down verbally.

when an idiot says the same thing about an impoverished, exploited, and misunderstood people, they get no rebuttal at all.

SHAME, ats, why are you not denying this rampant ignorance.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

if i were to say that i hope all the idiot redneck religious extremists should gun each other down, i'd be beaten down verbally.

when an idiot says the same thing about an impoverished, exploited, and misunderstood people, they get no rebuttal at all.

Come back and act like an adult If you want to debate with me...I don't respond to flame-bait.

Maximu§

Obviously, that is the response of a person desperately trying to validate his position when he's left without anything to add.
Such Histrionics only add to confirm this.

Hello. Histrionics:

n 1: a performance of play [syn: theatrical performance, theatrical, representation] 2: a deliberate display of emotion for effect

You've been accusing everyone who doesn't agree with you of anti-semitism/'hatred of jews'.

You've accused arabs of overbreeding, and as a race of being bombers.

You've accused me of being a 'sympathiser' with terrorism, a 'stooge' to terrorists, and of calling the Israelis 'sadistic'.

I think the word 'banal' may have been used as well. I could quite possibly have been 'maligning the truth' and 'snivelling', for good measure.

You've stated initially that the Palestinians were nomads, then that they lived in tents, although in an outbreak of reason you then admitted that they did live in brick buildings. 'Cowsheds' admittedly, but buildings nevertheless.

If *anyone* is being histrionic here, it ain't me.


People don't suicide bomb for recreation or amusement. It's abhorrent to me, but at the same time I can understand the reasons.

Again the familiar line of 'I hate yet I love it' ! So what is the word this time? "abhor"?

Oops. Making up words again.. I may be a stretch, but try and make the leap. I *abhor* terrorism. I *understand* that there are reasons why people committ terrorist acts.

If you are going to call me a terrorist 'sympathiser', find a quote where I explained I had SYMPATHY with what Hamas was doing.

Sure the only people who support or infact defend terrorist action these days are 'other' terrorists and the world recongnises this as so ,
The Palestinians have tunred car bombing into such an art form that it is hard for the reasonable person to accept it as anything more than the very nature of a people.

The IRA used car bombs. Does that make the Irish a nation of bombers?
ETA use car bombs. Does that make the Basques a nation of bombers?

I think I am a reasonable person. I tend not to tar an entire race of people in a negative way.

Where in *any* of my posts have I defended suicide bombing, the targetting of civilians, or indeed the murder of members of the military? Quote, please.

No excuse however covincing it may seem to the oppressed is excuse enought for terrorism. Such type of "crusader" rhetoric only seeks to perpetuate the violence as they find more and more "stooges" who claim to "understand" them .

I think in terms of this debate and historical relevancy, 'crusader' may have been best avoided.

As for 'stooge' - see above, under 'histrionics'.

Obviously one is always free to choose how one seeks to respond to their misfortunes in any way the see fit. The repurcussions of this however cannot be avaided. The Palestinians know this and want to con the world into believe in some psuedo-oppressed platitudes that the ignorant fall prey to.

Ever had the misfortune of being 'population transferred'? No? Me neither. Probably you're not qualified to judge how you would react.

It's always slightly distasteful when rich Westerners tell 'pseudo-oppressed' people how they should feel.

How very "eloquently" put

Anyway you banal iteration of IRA history is of little relevance or consequnce to this thread at hand. If anything the meager British response has gauranteed that such acts of desperation shall continue to be carried out in the hope that the rest of the world will be as "tractable" as the British were. However this display of weakness is not endorsed by the righteous. Isreal will not be dictated to by meager desperate men aka Terrorists.

Please give me your majestic interpretation of Irish History. I was trying to keep it short and on topic,and I stand by everything that I wrote.

My point still is (if you would read the post) - there were reasons around 10-15% of the nationalist community in NI supported the IRA in a terrorist campaign against the British presence. This is from my perspective as a UK citizen with family in the armed forces.

Am I saying there were no moral ambiguities in the British Government negotiating with terrorists? Nope. John Major was famously quoted as saying that it would 'turn his stomach' to talk to the IRA - this was whilst he negotiated.

Point is: 'moderates' on both sides took risks and weaned two communites away from violence and towards free local elections and local government - there were big compromises made on both sides and again, I think the links back it up.

Your alternative to this is what, exactly? Bombs still going off in London and Belfast? Same old cycle of violence because you cannot still understand the difference between 'understand' and 'sympathise'?

Apparently in your campaigne to malign the truth you have forgotten that this thread in not the appropriate place to satisfy your curiosity. Unless of course you want to test me ? In any case, a U2U is the proper means for such idle curiosity.

You made the statement in public, in this thread that:

1 arabs bred too much
2 you had served in the middle east and could tell us 'all about the arabs, and palestinians in particular'.

Don't make statements like that without expecting me ask for a clarification.

I distictly remeber the snivelling response you provided about the "oppressed" Palestinians when compared to their sadistic 'masters'. Followed shortly by a long prattle about the "middle ground" that such a problem needs. Apparently the Palestinians do not share your views on 'middle ground'. Thus, we see either a Terrorist organisation come to power or a devious dictatorship in what is supposedly passed off as a "mandate" by the Palestinians.
Pityfull really.

'Snivelling' and 'sadistic'. See above - under 'histrionics'. Also cut and paste my quote. Haven't used the word 'sadistic' once. Actually believe I said the IDF were pretty civilized.

My point is, you moaned about Arafat, and you are now moaning about elections. You don't strike me as a very happy person, really.


Dunno what sort of people would let a terrorist group stand for elections -
All I can say is that drawing terrorists into a political dialogue seemed to work in Ulster. The results are pretty plain for all to see.

Ah, so some truth at last with the "Dunno" !
The results are that now the inhabitants of Ulster or what ever you want to call North Ireland, have the choice of electing "thugs" into postions of power and legitimize the criminality of their action for all history.
What a shame is what the world says! So many British officers laid to rest by the IRA for what they assumed was their duty against criminals. They certainly will be all the more happy to know that the very people whom they have sacrified their lives for are the people who now them their "representatives". :shk:

I don't know everything, and don't pretend to. I'd argue it's a healthier worldview that your 'moral' certainties. I'm not going into Irish politics again, at least on this thread. See above for a rebuttal of this.

Just to repeat though - there's now a peace of sorts and a political process of sorts. What's your alternative?


1 You stop terrorism by recognizing that terrorism has causes, which is not
to say that you cave in to it. Not sure if the Palestinian refugee thing has been ceded or not by you. Probably not.

Your constant iteration of this mith is not going to make it true. It may be true to you but not to those in the know. Have you conceded to the fact that the Palestinians have displaced themselves due to fear of Jewish reprisals against them during the 1947 war even though this is what your most celebrated source has stated ?? No ?

Um. OK. Here's yet *another* link concerning the forced Palestinian exodus during the foundation of Israel.

www.theatlantic.com...

Read it *before* you condemn it because *no-one* comes out of it very well.


Am I saying that everyone was forced out? No - lots of people probably left because they felt threatened. Others were forced out. Point is, *and it's important* they haven't be allowed back since and their property has been seized.

There are links ad nauseum on this in from me, and from Archangel.

To be honest, I think you're using this as a diversion. Let's for one moment say that Palestinians all decided to flee without any coercive force. The important point is DID THE REFUGEES HAVE A RIGHT TO RETURN? Yes or No?


2 OK. When are you stopping?
3 Do we include extreme Zionist rhetoric and policies here? Sorry.

So when all reason fails I guess their is always histrionics to fall back on isnt there? Why am I not suprised by this ?

Histrionics. See first paragraph.

You said that extremist language and rhetoric should stop. You have used some pretty extreme rhetoric. I asked you when it was going to stop. How is this 'histrionic'?

4 Start co-operating with the UN concerning the return of refugees.
5 Start making acceptable compromises over the pre-67 status of the
country

Their can be no cooperation that threatens the very exsistence of Israel due to the violence that would erupt yet again all over Israel with the introduction of such belligerant elements.

So no right of return. Fair enough.

The UN speaks of letting the refugees return to their homes, their are no homes, as tents dont last more than a month inthe desert. The people who claim to be refugees are not the actual "refugees" but their descendents which is not covered by the UN.

1 Ah. Back to tents. I was holding out great hopes for cowsheds.

2 They weren't allowed back in 1949. See 1950 UN Resolution on right
of return. Are they supposed to avoid having children until
the situation is resolved? It's 2006 now, and no end in sight....

3 Actually, point 2 would solve your 'arabs breed to much' issue.

The status now is almost what it was pre-1967. The constant belligerance of Israels neighbours nessesitated the preventive measure to discipline the arabs into accepting peace. These disciplinary measure still are in force today in some areas where their is an elevated propensity towards terrorism.

East Jerusalem? Settlers in the West Bank?

Your are attempting to equivocate your stance further. Compassion is a sentiment that does not exsist towards terrorists any that show a propensity toward exhibiting it show not only a want of charecter but also an all encompassing cowardice in their personality.

Fair enough:

www.reference.com...

Like I said, dubious things happened on both sides in the foundation of Israel.

A foot in the door is all that is needed for this tuning into the "Arab and the Camel" story. How Ironic that this is especially true for the Palestinians !

www.boloji.com...

Are you referring to this? I thought you said that mass immigration was a good thing? Especially of course, as the Palestinian population lived there pre-1948!

Or is mass immigration only become a good thing if it's your sort of person?

Your quote below was to do with Palestinians bombing because they nothing better to do on a Saturday night.

That is also a very probable theory that has been underconsideration by many psychologists who tend to study their behaviour.

Care to quote said psychologists?

The reason of not bombariding these posts with links has already been said. I do not want to repeate that process again. I have advised you to look up past material on ATS to get all the links you want.

You're repeating a lot of other things, so you may as well repeat some good, solid sources.

I'd advise you to start reading some of the ones that have linked to on this thread.

Apparently you seem to be impressed by a few words strung together on any site.

Singularly unimpressed by the words you're stringing together.

IF that is your craving take it somewhere else.
As for the alleged evasion and abuse, I have encountered nothing but petty histrionics and cheap shots in your replies that obviously demean you but also in the process associate me with your infantile urges.

See 'histrionics' - first paragraph.

I'm taking your swerve from 'no Palestinians were evicted', to 'well, lots of Jewish people moved to Israel', as a *tacit* admission that morally questionable things were done in the foundation of the state.

I suggest that you take no such liberty, if you choose to do so it would be your folly as I have admitted to any Palestinian forced evictions. What I was trying to explain, unsucessfully it would seem, is that the real refugees are the Jews and not the Palestinians all along.

Sorry, you *have admitted* to Palestinian forced evictions, or are we talking typo here?

On the plus side, you appear to have at least admitted that there were a few tent-dwelling nomads (say 700,000 or so, haven't heard you dismissing those figures) who were displaced (one way or another) in the creation of Israel.

Right of Return has been dismissed because arab mass immigration is bad, whereas Jewish mass immigration to Israel was perfectly acceptable.

I refer you to the definition of 'refugee' (you used the word) in my last reply to you. It implies that displaced people would like to go home.

The Palestinans "fled" due to "fear" while the Jews were "forced" to relocate. This is yet again form YOUR sources. To deny this would be to say that your sources are wrong and all that you seek to establish by brandishing them is all incorrect.

Haven't *actually* read any of the links very well have we?

Yes, textbook response, as soon as you are caught, you try to associate yourself with some "Jewish" entity/person in order to hang on to any shread of credibility that is left of your argument.

You've been calling anyone that doesn't agree with you an anti-semite. What *exactly* have you caught me with, apart from an apparently masochistic desire to engage you in some sort of constructive debate?

*Please* explain to me how

1 providing evidence of a Palestinian Exodus of roughly 700,000 people
2 providing evidence of a Absentee Property Seizures
3 providing evidence of a UN-endorsed Right of Return of refugees

makes me anti-semitic. In your own time, please.

With words and phrases I actually used.

2 'Ethnic Cleansing' was a term used by Benny Morris, not me. There are links you know. I even posted them. He's not what you'd call a bleeding- heart liberal.
What would you like me to call it? 'Holiday Excursion to the scenic Transjordan desert'?

Beny morris is by no way an example or a model to any one, let alone one who wishes to make a credible argument.
Call it by its rightfully name, which is " WAR ".

Umm. You said the words 'ethnic cleansing' revealed the true extent of my hate/I had come out of the shadows, or some such nonsense.

You over-reacted, I provided my source. Still waiting for yours.

Never called you an Anti-Semite, but stated that you exhibit hate towards the Jews by accusing them wrongfully of "ethnic cleanising" .
It is rather You who has picked up the term, accused me of labeling you and denied it vehmently. Which is suspicious behaviour indeed.

See above. What is 'hate towards jews' other than anti-semitism? It's a subtlety I'm not picking up. Perhaps you can expand.

I would rather confess my hate than mask it as ambivalence and try to deceive and conceal my true intentions by equivocation and histrionics.
I suggest you follow that moto and have the courage to "Confess Hate".
As for my worldview I do not hate the Arabs personally, it is the "devil" inside them right now that I hate.

Histrionics. Paragraph 1. Top of this reply.

I don't regarding confessing hate as courage - rather absolute cowardice.

It takes courage to reach out towards different people and to make peace rather than war.

Rabin had courage.

Sadat had courage.

Bernadotte had courage.

They died trying to create *some* sort of peace in the Middle East, murdered by the people who look on the word 'understand' as some sort of obscenity. Not a million miles away from you really.

TD




[edit on 31-1-2006 by TaupeDragon]

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
when an idiot says the same thing about an impoverished, exploited, and misunderstood people, they get no rebuttal at all.

SHAME, ats, why are you not denying this rampant ignorance.

Hey Madness

I only got involved after reading that statement. And believe me, I've got better things to do with my life than rebut garbage like this!

TD

Originally posted by IAF101
If a link to the word "righ to Return" to google is your information, it is a joke.
google "right to live without persecution " ??

We have daced around it long enough.

Right of Return refers to the right for non-Jews, who fled from what was to become Israel in 1948, to return to their homes, and their lands.

Palestine Right To Return Coalition

Palestinian refugees are the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine, the majority of whom were dispossessed, ran away or were expelled when the state of Israel was created in 1948. This dispossession and expulsion has continued since with the second largest such event in Palestine taking place during the 1967 war, which Israel launched on its Arab neighbors and which resulted in the occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

Palestinian refugees generally fall into three main groups: Palestinian refugees displaced in 1948, internally displaced Palestinians who remained within the areas that became the state of Israel, and Palestinian refugees displaced in 1967 from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. For the past 57 years, Israel has continued to deny Palestinian refugees their right to return to their ancenstral towns, villages and homes.
Continued.

UN Resolution 194 calls for Israel to allowed these people to return to their homes.

The United Nations
.......
11. Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible;

The Jews are not in the habit of making suicidal decisions and allowing Terrorists back into their nation. The Palaestinians have not even exhibited the ability to give up violnce why would they be allowed back into israel ??

Were all of the nearly one million people really terrorists?

By what standards, and whos authority were all of them determined to be terrorists?

What about the Christians?

Maybe there could have been a few, or possibly thousands denied re-entry, but what about the other hundreds of thousands of people?

I dont see where your source says that the refugees decendents should be allowed to return ?? Or are you confabulating this inorder to prove something that has no case in the first place ??

Maybe not the decendants, but there are still many alive today that have not been allowed to return, and their land was confiscated.

Fabrication I am not attempting, but diversion you certainly are.

What about the last 58 years where Israel has denied these people the right to their own property in their own homeland?

No group gave any arab land away for it was not their land in the first place and the UN resolution was a peice of paper that was never accepted by either party and the state of Israel that was formed has no relation to the UN resolution because the Jews accepted it outright and so did the Arabs.
Thats why the tried to take it with war. I am sure I have told you this before but you want to keep twisting the facts to fit your agenda.

Excuse me?

PLEASE show us all the pre WWI map of the Jewish nation existing where Israel is today.

BEFORE the Brits invaded, and occupied the land belonged to the Islamic Ottoman Empire.

Friesian: THE OTTOMAN SULT.ÂNS AND CALIPHS

The land did NOT belong to the Jews before it was given away.

The Brits, and the UN did not have the right to give away what was not theirs.

None of the Arab nations, and none of the Muslim nations for that matter, supported the culturally and strategically important land being given away to create a bigoted nation that they knew could only result with oppositional zealotry and conflict.

I have never called you Anti-Semetic did I ? I jsut said that your hate towards the Jewish people is unjustified.

I don't hate Jews either.

Get that through your thick head.

By Birth I'm Jewish enough to become a citizen of Israel, but I am not a Jew.

What have I called for other than Truth, Equal Rights, and Israel behind the Green Line?

If thats hate then I'm a hater, and the word has no meaning.

Your views you call conveniently 'Anti-Zionic' but conveniently use this slip into anti-Jewish statements like calling Israelis "bigots" and "racist" when you should know that Zionism is a strong advocate of religious pluralism.

Zionism is about Jews, and only Jews.

By the definition of the word that is bigoted.

[edit on 31-1-2006 by ArchAngel]

Originally posted by IAF101
Yeah they had over 50 years to make peace and return but apparently, peace is not an option when cars and bombs are still available in the plenty. It also serves as a marketable skill I would think to their brethren all across the world.
As for the kids, their fate was sealed when the terrorists began strapping their own children with syntex and making them run into Israeli gaurd posts blowing themselves up. So yeah, it doesnt seem fair to the kids.

No one has ever strapped explosives to their own child, and sent them out to attack Israelies.

You are exagerating.

If any of the people were terrorists it was because what was theirs was being taken away, and out of the hundreds of thousands of people they were a very small number.

Terrorism cannot be the reason for denying right of return because most terrorism since then has been motivated by Israel denying right of return.

Its the single biggest reason the area was brought to a boiling point in 1967, and you have spent the last two pages dodging it.

Admit that the Palestinians have great grievances, and you will have a better time understanding the situation as a whole.

Originally posted by IAF101
...........
You asserted that the state of Israel had commited "ethenic clensing " which is nowhere near the truth. Is this not then the revelation of your 'hate' towards the Jews of Israel ?

Telling the truth equals hate?

DENYING the truth as you do is hatred.

ethnic cleansing
n.

The systematic elimination of an ethnic group or groups from a region or society, as by deportation, forced emigration, or genocide.

Answers.com

What Israel has done is Ethnic Cleansing.

You are confusing it with the term Genocide which is worse.

The line between is thin, or non-existant.

[edit on 31-1-2006 by ArchAngel]

To whom it may concern, all flaming, name calling and baiting will cease as of right now.
I think a nice, cleansing deep breath might be a good idea right about now.
If we cannot respect each other and stick to discussing this topic--and not each other--it is possible this thread will be closed.

[edit on 31-1-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

And exhale.....



TD

The world is watching Israel act like its above the law and the 'chosen people' Muslims and Christians and even Jews don't tolerate Israel. Israel is a pathetic state run by European jews. Look at the parliament, they look so white and not a drop of middle eastern blood in them.