So called Palestinians Freedom Fighters.

Originally posted by Saphronia

1) UP, i did not condone what is being done in Zimbabwe.

2) i offered solutions to a problem.

3) i believe there are many people suffering there because of white oppression and the government is anti-white because of this prolonged oppression.

4) i knew you would call me anti-semtic.

1) Noooo ? Really ? Do you know what ? Me, I condone it !

2) Killing all the whites i.e ?

3) Yes, they are suffering. The blacks, the whites,the green, the purples, the blue... all of them are suffering. But they are suffering because their president is a crazy leninist-marxist and a racist too !

Don't come to me with your eternal " all the whites are racists and are responsible from almost everything " rhetoric ! Try to use something else !

P.S 1 : Yes, you are anti-semit.
P.S 2 : This topic is not dedicated to the zimbabwe. Make another topic if you want. Anyway, there is a topic on this matter, somewhere on ATS. Use the " Search " function.

[Edited on 11-2-2003 by ultra_phoenix]

call me what you like, your opinion of my person is of no consequence to me. on the Zimbabwe question, it was posed to me in this thread by Grenadier and you also addressed it. in a discussion many things are brought up and though this thread is about one thing many off-topic incites can be addressed.

i choose to answer your post put directly to me because i feel some of your opinions are valid and i like healthy debate. but, i fear our debate is headed in an ugly direction. so i will agree to disagree with you on these points.

Saph...I dont know what color you are your posts are all grey!! I was refering to your obvious left viewpoint on issues and how when white people are the victims all leftwinger sympathy goes out the window reguardless of what color the left winger is!
Lets get some basic education on this no wealth is distributed it is earned period.
I aint going to get into a long imperialism debate here lets get back on topic.......Israel
At no point in history has a country of palestine existed. On british maps of the area prior to 1948 it is ref to as palestine but this is a territory not a country the Romans ref to it as palestine but again it was part of Rome not a independent country then it was part of the selgic turks empire and the ottoman empire then the british empire so on so forth.......
The so called palistinains are really just a native people who share land with other native people (hebrews) all semetic people all most likely decended from the Philestines (the sea people) scholars are still debating. But remember Arafat is an Egyptian!

Point is these people both were living here for 1000's of years but Saph is right religon is the root cause of this Muslims who can not get along or share with Jews. But here is the end of the debate.

In 1948 Israel was established then the Arab nations and Native Muslims attacked ........AND THEY LOST!!!! So we have two groups fighting over the same ground one side is beat so to the victor go the spoils. Now this is different because both sides have a claim it is like a really nasty custody case. Its not like one side was stealing from the other althought the Native Muslims did try to get a high powered lawyer (in the form of the Arab league, Syria, and Iraq). Now not only did they lose the Muslims then tried this same tactic 2 more times and they lost then as well!!! They then lost their high powered lawyer (the Arabs got tired of loosing) So the Native Muslims result to terriorism.............

The palistinains are considered by Arabs to be scum they are imported to places like Kuwait and Oman to be servants and un-skilled workers. Most of what was refered to as Palestine on the old maps lies in what is now Jordan so why are the palestinains blowing up Jews and not Jordanians???

Originally posted by Saphronia

but, i fear our debate is headed in an ugly direction.

Hum, what do you mean ? For you, and ugly direction is a direction that you don't like or direction that you don't want to take because you know that's dead-end for you ?

UP: while, you might think name calling is "cool" and "acceptable". i don't. so that i don't stoop to your level of _____ i'll back away. obviously this is a very important issue for you, for me it is not. i'm neither israeli or palestinian. there is nothing for me to gain in trading verbal punches with you. our opinions are fixed. so i'll agree to disagree respectfully, unless you have something to offer other than, selecting bits of my post and giving them you own defination.

Grenadier: you skipped a lot of "stuff" to come to your conclusions, like the palestinian perspective. there wasn't peace in histroic palestine before Israel was acknowledge by the UN. fighting had already began between jews and palestinians both sides were attacking each other as European jews fled to palestine because of anti-semitism in Europe. (this jew hating was the reason the Brits proposed the Jewish state there in the first place. so while we condemn the palestinians for not wanting to �share� with jews who invaded their lands, displacing and killing, what do we say to those who deemed that Jews couldn�t live peaceably in Europe?)

the new israeli forces were backed by the Brits as they forged there new nation-state. palestinians were evicted from their homes and run off of lands now declared israel. the nationals living there enlisted the help of the anti-semite arab nations who of course didn't want a jewish state next door, especially a democracy. they joined the fight for their own reasons just like Britian.

Israel won, but the job wasn't allowed to be completed. what to do with all these people who use to have homes, farms, and businesses but are now forced to live in other arab nations or refugee camps. how about assimilation? (your so-called live side by side) but, most of the palestinians are bitter and they don't want that, what they want is their homes back. their rational "how is it fair that someone can come into your home and declared it theirs?"

so, instead they choose to fight. uselessly, if you ask me and many palestinians that now consider themselves isreali-palestinians. but, the rest won't assimilate or move away. the people cannot be assimilated or re-located therefore only two options remain. create a state on divided lands or kill all those that oppose assimilation/re-location.

take your pick. they lived there before Israel was revived and they are not going away. this isn't Jordan's problem so asking why these people are refusing to move to Jordan is pointless. this is Israel's problem and they only have two solutions.

my post are grey because so are my opinions. and it does me well to remember that all of this is just opinion gained off of limited information.

Originally posted by Saphronia

1) so that i don't stoop to your level of _____ i'll back away.

2)obviously this is a very important issue for you, for me it is not.

3) i'm neither israeli or palestinian.

4) there is nothing for me to gain in trading verbal punches with you.

5) our opinions are fixed. so i'll agree to disagree respectfully, unless you have something to offer other than, selecting bits of my post and giving them you own defination.

1) My level of what ? Be more clear pleased.

2) He he...I feel that's important for you too.

3) Ho ? Then, what are you ? We are all allways "pro-something" or " anti-something". It's natural.

4) Punch ? Who's talkng about punch here ? It's you,not me. I don't want to " fight " with you saphronia.

5) Hey, look what I did. I replyed to EVERYTHING. Happy ?

Saph-You missed the point their was no Jewish invasion the Jews were always there they never really left even after the dispora there was always a Jewish presence in Israel. There was a rise in Jewish imigration to Israel after WW2.
The Jews in Israel didnt side with the Brits in fact there was a very organized resistance to British occupation that carried out terrorist attacks on british soldiers in the Territory. Ben Gurin (?) 1st Primminister of Israel was a member of this group.
The reason I brought Jordan into the matter was this the area that is jordan is mostly made up of what was "Palestine" on the maps the homeland of the Palestinians is mostly now controled by Arabs but they seek to destroy Jews and fight over 10% of the land???Its a ridiculus situation. You may be right about individual people who were displaced from their homes but on a greater scale both sides have had families displaced settlements destroyed bottom line is I think its too late to try and settle each individual case. I cant see where ownership would begin if we use your definition (occupation) How far back would you go? Dont get me wrong here I am a libertarian and I cant easily reconcile just "seizing" something! Was there a system of ownership of land that was recorded back through history? If there was no system then how can someone say they "owned" something?
Thats one of the problems I have with Native Americans saying they "owned" the US. Individuals own land. The NA's had no system of defining plots and ownership of said plots the whole tribe just lived in an area. This is not ownership! When Europeans came in and marked out a piece of property and said "mine" the NA's could not understand what we ment. Maybe if they had better Lawyers they would own the land!!!!

Grenadier: you make some very interesting points. still, now that the lands have been settled and named it's too late for palestinians to reclaim old lands even if they could prove the lands belonged to them.

i don't know whether or not they had a system of ownership in palestine before it became Israel again. but it seems to me any people...including the native americans...that are in possession of land when they come in contact with outsiders shouldn't be held to the outsiders laws of ownership. to think that two different cultures who have never come in contact with one another would have the same system of ownership is a little out there. while they may not have documents to prove they own the land, they live there. especially in the case of the native americans. but, that's prolly more of a moral stance than a legal one. i'm sure the palestinians (just like the native americans) have prolly exhausted all legal routes at this point anyways.

and even though there were jews already living in palestine the numbers that migrated after they gained statehood is more significant. even now, the Israeli government offers incentives for jews to come and live in the settlements. the numbers are still much smaller than those of the palestinians that were displaced...or that are seeking right of return.

my point was, it seems counter to the cause of Israelis to continue to deny the palestinians their own state. the more they refuse the less chance they have of ever living in peace. it seems they have chosen a to deal with the issue in a way that puts them in violation of UN resolutions, and sooner or later they will be facing charges of genocide.

Israel is just getting it too good. Just because they are the 'chosen ones', is the only reason why they are being 'babied' by most European countries including the U.S.

i don't know about the European countries but in the US its not so much the religious aspect...here money is power and power is policy. "the lobby" as it is called controls the policy. for some it maybe a religious thing but mostly it's just a money thing.