Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump administration backs bill to halt aid to Palestinians

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    There were in 1945 1 million Jews in the Arab countries (Palestine not included) ,now 4000.

    In 1947-48 they were persecuted, their properties were confiscated ,dozens were murdered (in Yemen almost 100),there was a succession of Kristallnachten .

    There were 840000 refugees between 1948-1972, 70 % went to Israel, the others mainly to Europe and NA .

    The Palestine refugees lost assets of some $4.6 billion (2012 prices), the Jewish refugees assets of some $ 6.7 billion .

    The anti-Semitic propaganda is always whining about the Palestine refugees,while remaining silent about the Jewish refugees .
    The idea that the Jewish lost billions of property in N Africa is a myth.
    The Jews left just like the Greeks left after they sold their property to go to places which offered better economic opportunities or to go to a new Jewish state which fulfilled the national aspirations of many Jews in the ME.
    Here is some information about he greatly diminishing numbers of the Greek community in Egypt.

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

    By 1940, Greeks numbered about 25,120...


    Exodus[edit]
    The exodus of Greeks from Egypt started before the revolution of 1952. With the establishment of the new sovereign regime of Gamal Abdel Nasser, rise of Pan-Arab nationalism, and the subsequent nationalisation of many industries in 1961 and 1963, thousands of Greek employees decided to abandon the country. Many of them emigrated to Australia, the United States, Canada, South Africa, Western Europe, and Greece. Many Greek schools, churches, small communities and institutions subsequently closed, but many continue to function to this day. The Nasser regime saw a big exodus of the Greeks from Egypt, but most of the minority left the country either before or after the period 1952-1970. The Arab-Israeli wars of 1956 and 1967 contributed to the uprooting of the sizeable Greek community in the Suez Canal cities, especially Port Said.

    Today[edit]
    Today the Greek community numbers officially about 1,000 people, with roughly 500 living in Alexandria,[
    So, stop spreading propaganda about pogroms that forced the Jews to evacuate ME and lose their property. Now, this does not mean that there were not sporadic cases of violence and even deaths, especially during periods of high tension during wars, or when Israel was caught to use Jewish-Egyptians for false flag operations of terrorism in Egypt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair) but the actual pogroms were in Israel, not in Egypt or the ME in general.
    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
      Jordan was not neutral in 1969 :it took the side of Egypt, thus, it was its own fault if it lost some territory; which was not its territory : in 1948 Jordan annexed the Palestinial territories west of the Jordan river . No one protested .
      Exactly.

      A bit of a double standard there where an "Arab/Muslim" nation is allowed to "get away with" something the Jewish nation isn't.
      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ljadw View Post
        The fact is that in 1948 Jordan occupied a big part of Palestine and thus prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state .

        The fact is also that in 1967 Jordan joined the anti-Israel coalition and can thus not whine when it lost the West Bank .

        The fact is also that the Palestinians are still today refusing to admit the legalityof the Israelian state and that it is their own fault if they lost the West Bank .
        The fact is that Palestinians are not trying to establish a Jordanian state. So, the facts that you mention are irrelevant, and it was not the Palestinians' fault that they lost the West Bank.
        And the fact is that Palestinians DO accept the right of Israel to exist. They just do not want Israel to exist in the West Bank, which is a totally different thing. I also posted a link from the US media to show than even the most Palestinian extremists of Hamas have modified their positions

        http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-h...501-story.html

        “We are ready to cooperate with Arab or any other international effort to achieve our people’s goals, get rid of the occupation, and establish a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders,’’ Meshaal said. The leader said Hamas, which is designated as a terrorist organization by Israel, the United States and the European Union, still rejects “the Zionist entity” and the Oslo peace accords.
        Last edited by pamak; 20 Sep 17, 17:02.
        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

        Comment


        • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
          Exactly.

          A bit of a double standard there where an "Arab/Muslim" nation is allowed to "get away with" something the Jewish nation isn't.
          The double standards are actually the ones westerners use when they criticize the stance of the Palestinians towards their Arab allies. People seem that they have forgot how the western democracies let the Soviet Union get way with various controversial policies and actions, such as the partition of Poland or the Katyn massacre, simply because they needed (actually preferred) to have the Soviets as allies. In the case of the Palestinians, it was not even a matter of preference. It was a matter of necessity!
          Last edited by pamak; 20 Sep 17, 17:24.
          My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post
            How I feel is that such a view would turn folks against Judaism^ that is to say if all Jewish folks agreed with for example the views presented by you above or Iljadw earlier itt.

            If Iljadw was Muslim and referred to Hindus as subhumans then some # of people in the world would turn against Islam.

            My take,


            I am a Catholic, I respect all religions and would support helping other people regardless of their skin color or religion.
            Except you hopefully wouldn't support the Aztec religion with human sacrifice as an essential dogma, nor the Nazi (Thule, Vril) religion and it's goals of ethnic/racial cleansing, so maybe not "all" religions ???

            Meanwhile, where Islam has as a foundation(requirement) the submission to Sharia Law and such is repressive of many human rights, especially for women and non-Muslims, you find no problem or issue with it's dogma and would place it on the same level as say most versions of Christianity or Budhism.

            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

            Comment


            • Originally posted by pamak View Post
              The double standards are actually the ones westerners use when they criticize the stance of the Palestinians towards their Arab allies. People seem that they have forgot how the western democracies let the Soviet Union get way with various controversial policies and actions, such as the partition of Poland or the Katyn massacre, simply because they needed (actually preferred) to have the Soviets as allies. In the case of the Palestinians, it was not even a matter of preference. It was a matter of necessity!
              At the time of the partion of Poland and Katyn massacre, the USSR looked to be in league with (Nazi) Germany in cartving up Europe and the "West" had limited capabilities to do much. Katyn massacre not known about until long after WWII as a USSR action. Other than protests, not much the "West" could do about such at the time.

              Jordan seixing the Est Bank of the UN 1947 "solution" underscores the Arab/Islamic rejection of a Jewish state of any size or sort. Stems from the concept of Dar al-Islam and a land once under Islamic rule must always be so, or returned to such. Israel could be a Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Pagan or any other religion/ideology state, but so long as it is no longer within the fold of Dar al-Islam it must be eliminated and returned to to Islamic rule.

              Excerpt;
              ...
              According to Abu Hanifa, considered to be the originator of the concept, the requirements for a country to be part of Dar al-Islam are:[8][9]
              1. Muslims must be able to enjoy peace and security with and within this country.
              2. The country should be ruled by a Muslim government.[10]
              3. It has common frontiers with some Muslim countries.

              ...


              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divisi...se_of_Islam.29

              Prior examples of "PLO" flags;




              Showing all of Israel as the target/goal.
              TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

              Comment


              • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                Except you hopefully wouldn't support the Aztec religion with human sacrifice as an essential dogma, nor the Nazi (Thule, Vril) religion and it's goals of ethnic/racial cleansing, so maybe not "all" religions ???

                Meanwhile, where Islam has as a foundation(requirement) the submission to Sharia Law and such is repressive of many human rights, especially for women and non-Muslims, you find no problem or issue with it's dogma and would place it on the same level as say most versions of Christianity or Budhism.

                I see no dogma of sacrificing people. Again, did you read the link with the Iranian-Jews who express their respect for the Iranian culture? The "submission to sharia" and its requirement for "human sacrifices" in the VERY ISLAMIC state of Iran did not seem to affect much their appreciation of the culture in Iran. This should make you pause for a little bit and examine what you say...

                In addition, as I have said numerous times, the moderate PLO politicians are SECULAR. They do not believe in creating an Islamic state.
                And, it is the job of the Palestinians to decide what they want to have in their own land. If the argument is that one should have a country only after he legislates a system of perfect rights then nobody would be able to organize a country in the first place, and most countries in today's world would not pass your test about human rights. Heck, the southern whites of just a few decades ago in the US would not have a right to pick their own government! If you want to talk in such terms, then we should send the British back to the ME to administer it according to the superior western standards because even Israel fails your (and the UN's) test of human rights, including of the the most basic ones, like having property in the West Bank.
                Last edited by pamak; 20 Sep 17, 17:57.
                My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 101combatvet View Post
                  Cut that OFF! We should stop all ad to these countries.
                  I don't disagree, Israel, SA, Palestine, etc should all be cut off.
                  "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                  - Benjamin Franklin

                  The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                    At the time of the partion of Poland and Katyn massacre, the USSR looked to be in league with (Nazi) Germany in cartving up Europe and the "West" had limited capabilities to do much. Katyn massacre not known about until long after WWII as a USSR action. Other than protests, not much the "West" could do about such at the time.

                    Jordan seixing the Est Bank of the UN 1947 "solution" underscores the Arab/Islamic rejection of a Jewish state of any size or sort. Stems from the concept of Dar al-Islam and a land once under Islamic rule must always be so, or returned to such. Israel could be a Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Pagan or any other religion/ideology state, but so long as it is no longer within the fold of Dar al-Islam it must be eliminated and returned to to Islamic rule.

                    Excerpt;
                    ...
                    According to Abu Hanifa, considered to be the originator of the concept, the requirements for a country to be part of Dar al-Islam are:[8][9]
                    1. Muslims must be able to enjoy peace and security with and within this country.
                    2. The country should be ruled by a Muslim government.[10]
                    3. It has common frontiers with some Muslim countries.

                    ...


                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divisi...se_of_Islam.29

                    Prior examples of "PLO" flags;




                    Showing all of Israel as the target/goal.
                    Actually you do not read my links.

                    First, regarding Poland, your observation that the Soviets were cooperating with the Nazis at that time actually reinforces what I say when I point at the way the western democracies reacted to the Soviet actions. So, the UK and France were ready to start a war against Germany after the latter invaded Poland. And when the Soviet Union participated in this invasion, neither the UK nor France felt any need to declare war against the Soviet Union. So, I am just pointing how it is hypocritical to talk about the Palestinian double standards in criticizing the Israeli but not the Jordanian actions during the first Arab-Israeli wars, even though it is quite obvious that the political and military necessities of the time made crystal clear that the Palestinians needed to have good relations with Jordan and were much more desperate and weaker than the UK and France were in 1939.

                    As for the Katyn massacre, I posted how the western powers refused the calls by the Polish government-in-exile in London to have an international inquiry and simply accepted the Soviet claims that the Katyn massacre was the work of Nazis even though there was overwhelming evidence that the Soviets were behind it. These are not my opinions. I just posted a CIA link which gave details...

                    https://www.cia.gov/library/center-f...9-00/art6.html

                    just an example...

                    In 1944, President Roosevelt assigned Capt. George Earle, his special emissary to the Balkans, to compile information on Katyn. Earle did so, using contacts in Bulgaria and Romania. He too concluded that the Soviet Union was guilty. FDR rejected Earle's conclusion, saying that he was convinced of Nazi Germany's responsibility. The report was suppressed. When Earle requested permission to publish his findings, the President gave him a written order to desist. Earle--who had been a Roosevelt family friend--spent the rest of the war in American Samoa
                    As for the PLO, there is no denial that in the beginning they did not recognize the right of Israel to exist. That was in general the case with all Arabs, and considering the land and demographic situation at the time, they had good reasons to think that they were used as a tool to correct the mistakes of others. As I posted, AT THE TIME, the Israeli claims were created after a massive influx of immigrants who went there with the specific purpose of creating a new state. And I am pretty sure that if Mexicans under similar conditions were trying to do something similar in the southern borders, most people there would not want to give a single percent of their land to foreigners who want to build a new state.

                    At the same time, it is undeniable that things CHANGE over time. People in Israel today have land rights that are accepted even by the PLO, Egypt and Jordan. Time creates "rights" and acceptance of a new status quo.
                    Last edited by pamak; 20 Sep 17, 18:34.
                    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                    Comment


                    • Don't pee off the President. There were some really exotic tropical diseases on Samoa back then like Dengue Fever and Elephantiasis. There are a lot more exotics there.

                      Pruitt
                      Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                      Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                      by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                      Comment


                      • There's a reason why we don't have Jews here anymore. They left due to the abject racism from a couple of members. I miss Golani.

                        I just wish the mods would clamp down on the liars.
                        Credo quia absurdum.


                        Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by pamak View Post
                          I see no dogma of sacrificing people. Again, did you read the link with the Iranian-Jews who express their respect for the Iranian culture? The "submission to sharia" and its requirement for "human sacrifices" in the VERY ISLAMIC state of Iran did not seem to affect much their appreciation of the culture in Iran. This should make you pause for a little bit and examine what you say...

                          In addition, as I have said numerous times, the moderate PLO politicians are SECULAR. They do not believe in creating an Islamic state.
                          And, it is the job of the Palestinians to decide what they want to have in their own land. If the argument is that one should have a country only after he legislates a system of perfect rights then nobody would be able to organize a country in the first place, and most countries in today's world would not pass your test about human rights. Heck, the southern whites of just a few decades ago in the US would not have a right to pick their own government! If you want to talk in such terms, then we should send the British back to the ME to administer it according to the superior western standards because even Israel fails your (and the UN's) test of human rights, including of the the most basic ones, like having property in the West Bank.
                          The bottom line amid all this rhetoric is that Palestinians but cease and reject terrorism if they want Israel or its supporters to ease up.

                          I'm not voting to cut them any slack as long as they are launching rockets or stabbing people. That has to stop.
                          A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by pamak View Post
                            I see no dogma of sacrificing people. Again, did you read the link with the Iranian-Jews who express their respect for the Iranian culture? The "submission to sharia" and its requirement for "human sacrifices" in the VERY ISLAMIC state of Iran did not seem to affect much their appreciation of the culture in Iran. This should make you pause for a little bit and examine what you say...

                            In addition, as I have said numerous times, the moderate PLO politicians are SECULAR. They do not believe in creating an Islamic state.
                            And, it is the job of the Palestinians to decide what they want to have in their own land. If the argument is that one should have a country only after he legislates a system of perfect rights then nobody would be able to organize a country in the first place, and most countries in today's world would not pass your test about human rights. Heck, the southern whites of just a few decades ago in the US would not have a right to pick their own government! If you want to talk in such terms, then we should send the British back to the ME to administer it according to the superior western standards because even Israel fails your (and the UN's) test of human rights, including of the the most basic ones, like having property in the West Bank.
                            Where did I say that Islam engages/promotes "human sacrifice" ???
                            That was the Aztec religion, mostly gone now, though one might wonder given the agenda of La-RAZA*, which is similar to a "Palestinian" analogy you present.
                            * La Raza;
                            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Raza
                            http://humanevents.com/2006/04/07/em...about-la-raza/

                            ... and one might wonder also on the aspect of Islamic Dogma where rewards are Greater in Paradise for the Martyrs ("sacrifices" ?) to the cause and spread of Islam ~ as mandated by Muhammad as one of his last orders.

                            But this is better discussed in this thread;
                            Islam - Jihad - GWOT

                            Meanwhile ... The "Agenda" of the Islamic/Arab Nations bordering Palestine since 1948 to 1973+ has been the destruction and elimination of Isreal, for the most part to comply with the Doctrine of Dar Al-Islam. And when it comes to "political agreements", "negotiations", and "deals", especially with "secular" Muslims, we must remember the concept of Taqiyya;
                            http://thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/taqiyya.aspx

                            The "Palestinians" plight is the result of the actions of their Islamic/Arab Nation neighbors and the outdated precepts of the Islamic religion. The Fault lies with-in the Dar Al-Islam and it is theior guilt and responsibility to absorb their Islamic brethern~Palestinians same as Israel(and the West) absorbed Jews displaced due to Islamic aggrssions against Isreal and Jews.

                            So to return to topic of this thread, heck no the USA and West owe NOTHING to the "Palestinians" and the burden is upon their fellow Muslims whom played the major role in placing the "Palestinians" in their conundrum!


                            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
                              The bottom line amid all this rhetoric is that Palestinians but cease and reject terrorism if they want Israel or its supporters to ease up.

                              I'm not voting to cut them any slack as long as they are launching rockets or stabbing people. That has to stop.
                              And i said in the beginning one can still engage the more moderates in the West Bank. Nobody said that the Israelis should engage Hamas or people who try to kill them.

                              The idea that somehow moderate Palestinians who DO reject terrorism should be engaged only after the complete elimination of terrorism is just an excuse to avoid negotiations. Nor does it make sense to expect that the Palestinians in the West Bank should somehow go after Hamas in Gaza to show their "zero-tolerance" for terrorism. As history shows, during periods of existential threats, politicians are pragmatic and tolerate many immoral actions. This is why I brought the reaction of the western democracies to the Soviet actions when they participated in Poland's invasion (and partition) and when they executed hundreds of Polish prisoners (including civilians and members of the Polish elite) @ Katyn...
                              My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by pamak View Post
                                And i said in the beginning one can still engage the more moderates in the West Bank. Nobody said that the Israelis should engage Hamas or people who try to kill them.

                                The idea that somehow moderate Palestinians who DO reject terrorism should be engaged only after the complete elimination of terrorism is just an excuse to avoid negotiations. Nor does it make sense to expect that the Palestinians in the West Bank should somehow go after Hamas in Gaza to show their "zero-tolerance" for terrorism. As history shows, during periods of existential threats, politicians are pragmatic and tolerate many immoral actions. This is why I brought the reaction of the western democracies to the Soviet actions when they participated in Poland's invasion (and partition) and when they executed hundreds of Polish prisoners (including civilians and members of the Polish elite) @ Katyn...
                                This IS a Military History forum and you might consider some time invested in learning such before posting more.

                                At the time Nazi Germany invaded Poland, "the West" in form of France and UK had treaty with Poland to come to mutual defense in case of German attack, but the USSR aspect wasn't in there. The USA was still playing the Neutral role and technically off the hook ~ sort of.

                                Meanwhile, the USSR moves into Eastern Poland weeks after the German invasion, and follows on with USSR taking the Baltic States and attacking Finland. UK and France were in midst of sending aid to Finlnad when Germany attacks Lowlands~Norway and eventually France. The West in form of UK and France rather distracted to do much about the USSR, a bit "tapped" as one could say.

                                The rest is history I hope i don't need to expand on here ...

                                Katyn massacre comes out about 40+ years later as the USSR is collapsing and other than some shock and some "outrage" at the revelation, what more would you suggest the "West" should have done that far down the historical track ... ???

                                Meanwhile, how about back to topic here ???
                                TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X