Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 12/5/03 11:17 AM, Pudduh wrote: I do indeed pay attention and from what I've seen, most Palestinian people are very determined to get their independence and also want to live alongside Isreal.

I didn't say that the don't. However, their terror groups think otherwise. While IRA, mostly, fighting for the independence of Irland. Also, you will probably agree with me that there is a big difference between the Irish-Europian mentality and Palestinian-Middle-Eastern.

If you were paying attention you'd notice that as well as the moderate groups like the mainstream IRA, you have the Extreamist Real IRA (who just want to attack the UK and cause mayhem) and the Unionist Paramilitaries (who want to kick the Irish out, through ethnic cleansing if neccessary).

I hope that you will excuse me for my ignorance on the subject of the Britain-Irland conflict- but I realy don't know to wich wings IRA divided. But baised on the info that you gave me I can understand that the IRA- as every movement- has an EXTIREME wing- and also a deliberative wing. However, in Hamas, for example, there is no deliberative wing.

In reality, the two are similiar in this way. If you (and the Irish Community in America) noticed that the Real IRA has been training people like Hamas then you wouldn't be so willing to give over their $$$ to the Irish Republican Cause now would you?

I don't think that I'll ever want to suport by $$$ any kind of terror group that act's against innocent civilians- even if their cause is very noble. The cause doesn't justify the means.

("As long as terror groups exist- it's not safe and not smart to give them a state. Let them get rid of their terror groups first.")

Yes very true. But at least give the people in Palestine who want rid of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc to actually get rid of them. Telling them to get rid of the terror groups is all very fine and well but wouldn't it be a good idea to co-operate with those Palestinian security forces willing to take out the terror groups? Why just leave Palestine on their own to sort out a problem (that frankly they can't solve on their own) with resources that they haven't got?!

Israel will be more than glad to help the Palestinians to get rid of the terror groups- but I don't feel that the current Palestinian goverment wants to get rid of the Palestinian terror groups. I'm sure that most of the Palestinian people don't want the terror groups- however, there is a feeling like Arafat is giving a ligatimation to the terrorists. More than once Arafat visited Ahmed Yasin- and it's look's like he doesn't want to get rid of the terror groups.

The truth is, that right now, when we have to trade prisoners with the Lebanese Hizballa, and to blow up the Iranian reactor- right now the PA problem is our last worry.

At 12/4/03 11:26 PM, Pudduh wrote: The fact is that you can't defeat a bunch of people like the Irish or the Palestinians with force. I think the UK proved that with its discraceful actions in Ireland in the early 1900-1920's (i.e. the Blacks and Tans).

There is a "small" difference between the Palestinians and the Irish. They have a whole different mentality. Pay atantion to the fact that the Irish groups wanted an independence and right to exist beside Britain. However the Palestinian groups want to destroy Israel and all the western world. Maybe all that Palestinian people want is to have their own land- however- as long as those extreme terror groups exist and have a ligetimation for their acts I can only imagine what they would be able to do when they will have a new counry in wich they will be able to prepare their terracts against the western world. Specially when they will have acsses to the sea. As long as terror groups exist- it's not safe and not smart to give them a state. Let them get rid of their terror groups first.

At 12/3/03 12:54 AM, Pudduh wrote: So, theres more Racism against Blacks and Asians than there is Anti-Semitism in the UK.

Who said that? Do you have a statistics?

Theres more Anti-Catholic strife in some parts of the UK (and I don't just mean Northern Ireland) than there is Anti-Semitism.

Maybe.

In places like Japan and China and the far east, people don't even really give religion like Judasim much more than a glance.

You're wrong. In Japan there is a very big sect of philo-semitic Japanese who believe that Jews are the chosen people. In china there was, untill the 20's of the 20th century, a Jewish comunity in China. The Chinese Jews looked as ordinary Chinese- however, by their tradition, they were the offsprings of some of the Israelit tribes. So, in places like Japan, China and the far east people do know who are Jews- and they know that it is a nation.

So to say that NOWHERE is safe for people who practice the Jewish faith (note that I don't really use the word Jews, as one elderly German said as in a debate once "When they sent me to the Deathcamps they called me a jew. A jew? I thought I was a German who's religion was Judasim!" and thats my opinion) is quite silly.

Youre saying that there are safe places in Europe for Jews because there are people that are hated more than Jews? Interesting. And, you wrong, we are a nation! We are the offsprings of the Israelits. The people that are mantioned in the bible. There were archeological findings that proof that the Jews did lived in Israel 2000 years ago. Many Jews don't see themselves as part of the Jewish nation- Just like the Afro-Americans don't see themselves as Africans. However we are a nation. Jews were killed in Germany because we belong to the Jewish nation and not because we belong to the Jewish religion.

The fact still remains that there are two sets of people on that land, now regardless of who was there first or who wrote their holy scriptures first or who got to the British Foreign Secretary first or whatever the question is this. If this is indeed the indicated place for the Jewish Holy Land then what are we going to do about the million odd Christian/Muslim Arabs? Are you going to throw them out? Ship them out to Europe? Considering that there is talk in Europe about Isreal making an application to join the EU that wouldn't be very wise.

Who said that we want to throw them to Europe. They can live here. And, I personally against joining to the EU. So what if the Italian P.M want's us to be there so that Israel will give him a back-up? I think that we should stay away of this socialistic union.

If you're not going to ethnically clense the west bank and Gaza then do you agree to a Palestinian State?

I don't have a proplem with Palestinian state. But they should stop terror first. Is it so hard thing to do?

Comments please...

"One's man's death is a tragedy- a death of milions is a statistics." said Stalin

Stalin killed many jews too and many other people that he called "traitors". He killed more people than Hitler. However, Hitler ruled less time. I think that if Hitler was ruling at least half of the time that Stalin ruled- he could have triple number of victimes than Satlin.

Hitler is worse.

A very disturbing article was published this week in the weekly appendix of the Israeli newspaper "Ha'aretz". In Europe Israeli Professors are being fired only because they're Israeli, Israeli students in the Europian Universities are being discriminated. Why? "pure political reasons." That's what happens when academics are being mixed with politics...

Dr. Miriam Shlizinger and Professor Gidon Torry couldn't believe that this happened to them. In Juny 2002 Profesor Mona Baker from the Uneversity of Manchester demended from Dr. Miriam Shlizinger and Professor Gidon Torry to writte a resignation letter- when they refused Professor Baker fired them. "My decision is political, not personal", Said Baker, "I'll still treat you as friends- in my personal life- but I can't continue to with an official connection with Israel in current situation".

Professor Baker, with many other Professors, is runing a massive excommunication against the Israeli Professors and students- she claim that the Israeli Professors aren't doing anouth to influence their goverment, she think's that this excommunication will create pressure that will make the Israeli goverment to "act in the right way". By her opinion, all the Israeli Professors are "cooperators" with their goverment actions.

That's not what Dr. Shlizinger think's: ten years before she was one of the poblishers of the "independent report about the condition of the territories"- that was characterized as very leftist and pro-Palestinian reports. Shlizinger always was against her goverment actions- but never thought that she will become a victim of the same ideas.

Professor Baker goes even beyond that and say's that all the Israelis are war criminals- because by the Israeli law every Israeli must serve 3 years in the army when he gets 18(girls serve 1.5 years).

"I never done something immoral when I served in the army." Says Amit Duvshani- an Israeli biology student who was surprised to get an E-Mail from Professor Andrue Vilki from Oxford: "I think that it(the doctorate) won't work between us. he wrote to Duvshani "because the Israelis are using the excuse of the Holocaust to justify the sufering that is being made to the Palestinians. I can't work with some one who served in the Israeli army."

Most of the Israelis never served in the territories. There where many Israelis that did served in the Northern border- or those who served in the home front.

So what do you think about that?

(the pic beneath- from "Ha'aretz"- 'Does Israel is in academic ghetto?')

"God is dead", said Nietzsche.
"Nietzsche is dead", said god.

Sorry that I laughing at your sig, theredgoatee. It just reminded me the joke above.

P.S: Have you read the book "when Nietzsche cried"? It's a great book, very philosophic.

At 11/28/03 11:19 AM, THE_HULKSTER wrote: Angel, this is directed towards you.
What would you do if you were sitting in a house that has been in your house for generations right now, minding your own business. Mind you, it's not a large or fancy house, but you manage to get by, and keep a low profile in your town. You never make people angry at you and are liked by most.
Then one day, your door is kicked down and a squad of men with large guns pointed at you demand you leave your house right now and never come back because the homeless man down the street has suffered so much and he deserves a safe place to live.
Would you be angry? Would you try to get your house back?

This story is more reminding the story or the Jewish people that were kiked from threir house 2000 years ago. And the Jews got now their home back. I'm against deporting people against their free will- and I disgrace that. However, as I said, many Arabs left Israel in 1948/1949 from their free will or by the threatening or their own religious leaders. And, It happened many years ago. We can't bring back time.

At 11/26/03 01:19 PM, Slizor wrote: Just because you haven't looked, doesn't mean there aren't any. There are always dissidents.

All right. There are fews. However those people are also not a good source because they so tired from the conflict that they picked the other side- Just like some that became pro-Palestinian because they wanted to look like they're not biassed.

Heh, this just shows how poor your definition of "anti-semite" is.

I know what you mean. And- NO, you're wrong. Arabs are semites too- but the term "Anti-semite" is officially saved for Jews only. Someone who hate Arabs called Anti-Arab and not Anti-semite.

That would be put forward be someone whose views are so rejectionist, as yours are. I mean, threatening the existance of Israel? What bullshit.

It's not a bullshit- I'll see how your country will deal with terror when it will hit you- and I don't doubt it will... Israel if the frontier where the western world is standing against the Islamic fundamentalistic terror- and after they will finish with us you'll be next! Thats why all the western countries should hope that will win the war against terror- because if we won't it will be your turn to sufer from terror.

At 11/26/03 05:44 PM, Zalbun wrote: As A Jew Im appaled at your comments. People like you are the reasons Jews get a bad name. Go listen to your Streisand.

No, people like you are those who making the Jews bad name!

You trying to look objective- but all you do is too pick the other side.
The world won't like you more if you'll grovel before it. It's your people that we're talking about- and there is no way that you will manage to be objective about this. Get rid of your Jewish-inferiority-complex and ask yourself: why the Jews can't have their holy city to themselves? Why they "don't have the right to have their land"? And the answer is that we're worth not less than others- and we deserve to have our own land!

"I know that there are always two sides of the same coin- however, I prefer my side" someone once said.

P.S: When I read this message again I can see that it may be bit insulting. If incidentally I got you wrong- please take my apologies beforehand.

At 11/26/03 11:03 AM, theredgoatee wrote:

The Jewish holy book doesn't teach forgiveness.

You're wrong. The Jewish "Talmud" say's that a Jew that don't know forfiveness and compassion- his Jewishness can be put in a doubt. You don't know nothing about Judaisem. Jewish can forgive- but there is a limit to their forgivnes- 5.27 milion is their limit.

And I think that you'll agree with me that there is a difference between simple war criminals and Nazis. War criminals are going against the law of the country- and that's why they should be punished by their country's law. However Nazis are a whole different thing.

At 11/26/03 07:49 AM, HurricaneNick wrote: Obviously the city needs to be considered as part of a more general plan for the Middle-East. including Israel, and Iraq (which is in desperate need of carving up)

Jerusalem is one of the main reasons for the Mid East conflict- but if you use it right it can be the reason that will end up the conflict. Remember: this is the only city that the neither of the 3 great monotheistic religions would not want to hurt...

You all should be happy that you have a choise. I don't have one. Two years from now, when I'll be 18, I will go to the Israeli army for 3 years of my life. And it doesn't matter if I want to or not- because this is the law. (Thanks to my knowledge in foreign languages they'll probably will sand my to the intelligence force and if not that- I'm sure that it'll be something not less "fun") . So, while you all will learn in college(or not) I will be risking my life in the army.

Anway, soldiers should be respected- and it's not matter if those are American soldiers, or Saudi soldiers. All the soldiers do is protecting their country. If you have a problem with the military actions- blame the goverment, the Generals- but not the soldiers.

Of course if a soldier does a military crime- he should bear the consequences- but it is a whole different discussion...

At 11/25/03 05:53 PM, Sophia_7 wrote: Yrushalayim was founded by the Jews and the 1st Holy Temple was built there before Christianity and Islam even existed !

Now Christianity and Islam both want control of he Jew's holy city because of Jesus' and Muhammed's experiences there, how does that equate to kicking the Jews out of THEIR holy city ?

Actually, Muhammed never been in Jerusalem- the Muslims invented the legend that Muhamed flew above Jerusalem when he ascended to the the sky. It even doesn't written in the Koran. Not to mention that Jerusalem is only third holy city to the Islam, and Second for the Christianity- when for the Jews it's the holiest place.

At 11/23/03 09:13 AM, Slizor wrote: I feel like I'm wasting my time with you. A good source to criticize Palestinians are dissedent Palestinian Academics (not the organisation run by a 17 year old girl.)

There are no such people. And you know that. Specially those who learned in the Palestinian Palestinian Bir-Zait university are very anti-Israelis. However, you'll find many jews who speak against jewish religion or against Israel. Because, there are some Idiots among our people that want to show that they are "very objective" and "unbaist"- and that's why they pick-up the opposite side even if they wrong. If you will read the jewish history you will learn that the most radical anti-semits are usually the Jews themselves.

However, I think you will find it hard to support your rejectionist views with good sources.

My rejectionist views? And what about your rehectinist views? you still reject the fact that the Palestinian terrorists aren't fighting for their indipendence- they are murdering innocent civilians and freatning for the existence of Israel.

This massege want to dedicate to the most disputable city in the world. Israel want's to keep it, the P.A want's to have it for itself, and the UN will be more than glad to make this city as their. The city have many names. By the Jewish tradition it has 100 names. And the muslims call it Al Kuds. No one knows what is so special in this city- there are those who say that there is special aura in the city- there is much more light in Jerusalem that in other cities. Mabe that's the reason why by many generations Jerusalem was also called "Golden Jerusalem". The most popular names are: Jerusalem(also pronounced as Yerushalaim, Yerushalem and Yerusalim)- in ancient Hebrew: Complete city or United city(origin: Bible and other ancient documents from the same time), Zion- ancient Aramaic: The City of golden Sands(origin: Bible), Ir David- Hebrew: City of David(origin: Bible and other ancient documents from the same time), Al Kuds- Arabic: The Holy city(origin: Koran and Islamic tradition).

I won't lie to you- I prefer that Israel will keep Jerusalem for itself. However I will like to hear your opinion. What should be done with that city?

P.S: Under the heading aforementioned below I gave the wrong qute. Here is the right one:

In my city Haifa, for example, Israeli soldiers called the Palestinians to stay- and promised not to hurt them.

"There is an overwhelming body of evidence from contemporary Arab, Jewish, British, and American sources to prove that, far from seeking to drive the Arabs out of Haifa, the Jewish authorities went to considerable lengths to convince them to stay. During the fighting in the city in April 1948, The Hagana’s truce terms stipulated that Arabs were expected to "carry on their work as equal and free citizens of Haifa." "(source: http://www.palestinefacts.org/ )
However "...the Arab Emergency Committee, under orders from the Arab Higher Committee, was doing its best to get them out. Scaremongering was a major weapon in its arsenal. Some Arab residents received written threats that, unless they left town, they would be branded as traitors deserving of death. Others were told they could expect no mercy from the Jews."(source: http://www.palestinefacts.org/ )

So, after I gave you the right qutes, why do you think that Arab leaders wanted to get the Arabs out of Israel? And why did Israelis tried to keep them in?

At 11/22/03 09:24 PM, gerbilfromhellll wrote: lets see, you get rid of the rich and the extremely religious, and you're still left with tens of thousands of palestinaens who didn't leave by their own free will. is it a lie to say it's 'a handful'. no, of course not. is it the truth? no, of cousre not.

Right. The ones who stayed was Christian Arabs or Un-religious. And many of them are slill here in Israel- having absolute all civil-rights of an Israeli citizen. The "handful" who were expeled wasn't such handful- however they were small numbers compared to the numbers of rich and the extremely religious Arabs who left Israel in the begining of the war.

i may be in support of certain of israel's actions, but i'm not so blinded that i can't tell facts (and lies/major truth-stretchings) when i see them. unlike certain people, who view EVERYTHING israel has ever done as good....

I never said that everything that Israel did was all good- I don't view this in such way. There are many actions of Israel that I can't agree with. But now we're talking about this event- and I believe that the first Israeli goverment was not responsible for the deportation that taked place in only 3 small Israeli cities and free will departure of rich and religious Arabs.

At 11/22/03 05:14 PM, punk_disease wrote: Just about every website used as a source is Jewish. It'd be nice to have sources that aren't dripping with Jewish or Palestinian bias. Thanks.

You won't find such sites. Everyone are baist. The're is no objectivity in the Mid east- because everyone involved.

Anyway, I you'll find a unbaised source please tell me- I'm looking for one too... The source must show the both sides as they are- and not only one of as all-good while the other is shown as all-bad.

Slizor- this thread is for you. Did you wanted sources which confirm my arguments in my last post? Here they are:
The Arabs left Israel in 1949 from their own free will
"The vexing question of the "Palestinian Refugees" is one of the perennial open sores of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. The Palestinians left their homes in 1947-48 for a variety of reasons. Thousands of wealthy Arabs left in anticipation of a war, thousands more responded to Arab leaders' calls to get out of the way of the advancing armies, only a handful of them were expelled.(source: http://www.palestinefacts.org/

In my city Haifa, for example, Israeli soldiers called the Palestinians to stay- and promised not to hurt them.
"A good example is events of the War of Independence period in the city of Haifa. When hostilities between Arabs and Jews broke out in 1947, there were 62,500 Arabs in Haifa; by May 1948, all but a few were gone, accounting for fully a tenth of the total Palestinian dispersion."(source: http://www.palestinefacts.org/ )

Many Palestinians left Israel be in encouragement of their leaders
"In 1948, some 750,000 Arabs left Israel at the urging of their political leaders, who promised that within two weeks they would come back as victors and take over Jewish property."(Source: http://www.newsmax.com/)

Is it anouth sources for you?

Slizor- this thread is for you. Did you wanted sources which confirm my arguments in my last post? Here they are:
The Arabs left Israel in 1949 from their own free will
"The vexing question of the "Palestinian Refugees" is one of the perennial open sores of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. The Palestinians left their homes in 1947-48 for a variety of reasons. Thousands of wealthy Arabs left in anticipation of a war, thousands more responded to Arab leaders' calls to get out of the way of the advancing armies, only a handful of them were expelled.(source: http://www.palestinefacts.org/

In my city Haifa, for example, Israeli soldiers called the Palestinians to stay- and promised not to hurt them.
"A good example is events of the War of Independence period in the city of Haifa. When hostilities between Arabs and Jews broke out in 1947, there were 62,500 Arabs in Haifa; by May 1948, all but a few were gone, accounting for fully a tenth of the total Palestinian dispersion."(source: http://www.palestinefacts.org/ )

Many Palestinians left Israel be in encouragement of their leaders
"In 1948, some 750,000 Arabs left Israel at the urging of their political leaders, who promised that within two weeks they would come back as victors and take over Jewish property."(Source: http://www.newsmax.com/)

Is it anouth sorces for you?

At 11/18/03 12:09 PM, Slizor wrote:

And the Jews did "big pogroms" against the Arabs. Israel was founded by terrorists such as Ben-Gurion. Ironic really.

Ben-Gurion was a socialistic farmer- not terorist. To remind you- even in the wose Jewish armed actions they didn't hurt citizents. The Jews did no pogroms against the Arabs.

Ah, so they bombed the King David Hotel......in defence. A very defensive move it was indeed.

It was an action against the British not against the Arabs.

And I have "facts".

You have none.

You seem to have rejected all of the on pretty weak grounds. While you just present what you have heard (no actual sources) and declare that truth.

If you wonder why I don't give you sources- it is not because I can't find some- it because I don't have much time to search for them. However I will try to give you sources from now on.

There are facts. Isn't it a fact that 6 milion jews were killed in WW2?

No. http://www.yad-vashem.org.il/about_holocaust/faqs/answers/faq_3.html

Alright, excuse me- 5.29 million to six million. Is that more precise?

Isn't it a fact that the British never droped a nucleolar bomb?

No. http://www.country-liberal-party.com/pages/Bob-Varney_Links.htm

I meant that Britain never nuked enother country- not itself.

Just as those examples, it is a fact that Israel doesn't do ethnic cleansing.

No. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/dec2002/isra-d03.shtml

I don't know from were did they got this info- but Sharon never said that he want to do ethnic cleaning or that he wants to move out the Palestinians. He will ever try to do such thing- he will loose his job in no time- the Israeli media will eat him alive.

They didn't. But it doesn't mean that Britain didn't conquered Palestine.

Do you plan to introduce logic into your rebuttal? Y'know maybe an argument which supports your view?

I can give you a lot of hebrew info- but you will say that it's baist.
Anyway, I'll try to find something for you.

At 11/17/03 05:14 PM, Slizor wrote: The truth is not propaganda, however you do not posess the "truth".

Oh, and how do you know that? Do you possess the truth?

22% is not a reference to population size, it is the stated aim of the PLO to obtain 22% of the land.

So I'm saing to you- the Palestinians sayed in their place- they just now being called "Israeli Arabs". Some of the Palestinians run away to the territories when the two counries was declared, and some of them was expeled- from those cities that I toled you.

Bullshit, the British restricted immigration. The Jewish population was roughy about 30% with Jewish land ownership at 7%.

They resisted it- however the jews came in any way.

And the Jews did "big pogroms" against the Arabs. Israel was founded by terrorists such as Ben-Gurion. Ironic really.

Untrue. The Jews only protected themselves- they didn't killed innocent Arabs.

And I have "facts".

You have none. And you can't blame a sovereign country in a crime without proof.

You've never properly studied history have you? You'd know there is no such thing as "facts".

My father is historian, with master's degree. When I was litle I my father told me about the french revolution and other historical events instead of fairy tales- so I'm the last one about who you can say "never properly studied history". There are facts. Isn't it a fact that 6 milion jews were killed in WW2? Isn't it a fact that the British never droped a nucleolar bomb? Just as those examples, it is a fact that Israel doesn't do ethnic cleansing.

Wait wait wait, you honestly believe such a blatently racist generalisation discounts Le Monde?

Yeah. What do you think Le Monde is? A bible? Le Monde is as baised as the other french papers. Don't forget that in those papers was also written once that the Jews drinking babies blood and that Draifus is a jewish spy.

When Britain and America pushed Hitler out of France in WW2, did they conquer it?

They didn't. But it doesn't mean that Britain didn't conquered Palestine.

No, not really. ainly because we're not religious.

Yeah right. "God save the Qeen" means nothing... You all just say it for fun, right?

At 11/15/03 07:52 AM, Slizor wrote: I meantioned propaganda, you tried to spread it.

I do my propoganda. The truth isn't a propaganda.

Does only people who go to church are religios?

Of course not, there are temples and mosques and so on. However people who class themselves as Catholic or Protestant would have to go to church to be considered religious.

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

Okay, so there were Palestinians in the whole of the area know as Palestine, this is say 1900. Now, a hundred years on they are in like 22%.

It doesn't mean that they was moved by force- they just stopped being majority. Fact: In 1948 the jews was already majority- and there was no transfer before or in 1948. So how did the jews became majority? Thenks to the big waves of jewish emigrations to Israel in 20's and the 30's. May I mantion that in those years the Arabs did big pogroms aginst the jews- when the british did nothing to stop them. When were you then? Why then didn't you said nothing?

you can't say that it is what the Israelis do.

Yes I can.

You cannot. Not without any facts wich say that right now the Israelis do ethnic cleansing.

This part of your post lacks both coherance and logic. You are saying "No no and thus no", that's not an argument.

How can you argue with me about facts? It is a fact that Israeli soldiers doesn't try to deport Palestinians. It total nonsence to say they do...

A pointed attack against a nation in intation to kill all the Israelis till the last one- is an obvious atempt to do a Genocide.

:you assume that intentions of "terrorists".

I don't assume. Hamas and the Hizbullah, for example, saing openly that their target is to eliminate all Israelis.

In "1948 and After" (...)http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story674.

html

Now I know you're going to say that obviously a story on "Palestine Remembered.com" is going to be biased, but it is from Le Monde and is not the work of the owners of the site.

Wow, the French are totaly not baist- the fact that by the "Jewish-federation" survey they are the most Anti-Semitic country in the world!

No, they were awarded it. Can't you read?

If you will open your History Book you will see that in WW1 one of the frontiers was Palestine. The British attaked the Turkes from Egypt and conquired Palestine from the Turkes, with help from the intelligence of the Israeli-Zionistic organiztion NILI.

LOL. Now we're even: you said that the jews have "God's chosen people complex"

And they do, mostly. So do Americans.

Interesting... And the British don't have such problem?

At 11/14/03 08:08 PM, jonthomson wrote: That's not relevant at all considering that a large proportion of that list will consist of EU member states... that's like having major league baseball invite the Japanese champions into the league. They may be the 31st best team in the world, but if all the teams in MLB are better, it doesn't make the league stronger at all.

Israeli economics, that not in it's best shape right now, still much better than some EU member countries.

At 11/13/03 01:34 PM, Slizor wrote: It always gets to the point when Israel supporters bring up their stupid propaganda.

Propaganda? Who talked about propaganda?

Above you agreed that people don't go to church. Clearly Europe isn't religious.

Does only people who go to church are religios?

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

Israel doesn't do systematic elimination of an ethnic group from the region. Besides, you gave a defenition of "ethnic cleansing" and not genocide. Also writen that Genocide is a sort of ethnic cleansing- however, you can't say that it is what the Israelis do. And, I can argue about that Israel doing an ethnic cleansing- because there was no atempt to deport them or to destroy them. As by these facts your clame that Israel doing Genocide or ethnic cleansing have no base and irrelevant.

The Israelis are experiencing genocide?

A pointed attack against a nation in intation to kill all the Israelis till the last one- is an obvious atempt to do a Genocide.

Honestly, source assessent is something so useful.

It is a known fact that the Arabs were expeled only from 3 cities.

Palestine was a mandate fro the eague of Nations after World War 1. They did not conquer the land as they conquered Ireland, India and America (etc.

They conquered it from the Turkes- nice achivement! Very different from other conquers.

Ah so it did take place?

I didn't said it wasn't- it is a known fact that from some small cities(acctually 3) a tranisfer took place- but it's not representive.

PS: I think your jibes at my nationality are misplaced, to say the least.

LOL. Now we're even: you said that the jews have "God's chosen people complex" and I joked bit about the British.

At 11/12/03 04:39 PM, Slizor wrote: No it doesn't. It's like arguing Britain is more autocratic because we still have a monarchy. It is one of a number of redundencies in the British system.

Alright, let's say you right... Because I don't have time to argue with you that Britain is more autocratic.

So.....you're conceding that Europe isn't Catholic?

Europe is mostly Catopic and partly Protestant- but it is absolutly Christian.

What the Israeis are doing is genocide, it's no holocaust but it is a genocide.

Check in a dictionary what is "Genocide"- it is extermination of people by their race or religion. Israel doesn't try to exterminate Palestinians, and Israel doesn't hunt them for their race. Think better before you throwing false accusation in the air.

Denying the use of the word "genocide" is belittling the situation of the Palestinians.

I'll say the opposite sentence : When you're using the word "Genocide" to describe the situation of the Palestinians, without justification- you're belittling the situation of the Israelis.

Ony crush and subjegate them? Ethnic cleansing, as was done by the Israelis on the formation of Israel and is currently being doing is genocide.

Oh, another myth. The so called, "Transfer", taked place in 1949 only in 3 small cities: Lod, Tsfat and Ramla(note: don't confuse between the Israeli R-a-m-l-a and Palestinian R-a-m-a-l-a.) The other Palestinians left Israel by their own will encouragement of the Arab counries that toled them to leave the country because they going to attack Israel. In Haifa, for example, Israeli soldiers(that was compound of university students and boys scouts- because Israeli armey wasn't formed yet then) drived their jeeps and called the Arabs to stay when they promissed that they won't hurt them- however the Arabs didn't listen.

No, because the British didn't dispossess the Palestinians, or even conqurt the land.

What?! So what have they did here exept conquering the local Arabs???(I call them "local Arabs" because there was no Palestinain nation then).
By the way, Transfer is a british idia to the, so called "Palestinian Problem".

At 11/12/03 04:46 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: Or maybe the EUROPEAN Union doesn't want Non-European members. Cos that would kind of defy the point, wouldn't it?

No. EU wants to join with non-Europian members- it is a fact.

At 11/11/03 11:48 AM, Slizor wrote: Britain is definately not religious, although the Anglican Church still is part of the state.

And it makes Britain more religious than Israel, for example, because contrary to Britain Israel is an "jewish secular state"(as it was declared in it's "Proclamation of Independence")

Germany is pretty unreligious too (Official figures say 1/3 Prod, 1/3 Cat and 1/3 unaffliated) and France does have a catholic majority. However, in most First world nations most people are not properly religious, however they count themselves on the census data (Britain has like 2% of people going to Church regually, but the census data says that like 50% consider themselves religious.)

Yeah, I know, the most of the Europians don't go to Church regularly every week just as most of the Israelis don't go to synagogue every week.

Well they probably wouldn't have called it Genocide because the word wasn't invented. Can you please explain your point about conquering?

When you call some small gunplays between the Palestinians and Israeli soldiers "Genocide"- it is disparagement to the suffer of people who have been get through a real Genocide as the Jews in WW2. You know well what is Genocide- and it can't fit it to what happening in the teretories- Israel doesn't try to destroy the Palestinian people.

"even that they where much more cruel to them then us."

I find that hard to believe or probably do.

Why? Because you've been taught that the British soldiers are doing only noble things?

At 11/10/03 01:11 PM, MyNamesSteve____nner wrote: I see what you're saying, but to me - spirituality and moral values are how you control yourself...organized practices, traditions, rules, and viewpoints (aka "religion") is how you control others.

You can be a spiritual person without being religious, and you can be a religious person without having any true spirituality. I'd rather not follow what a preacher says when the other preacher down the street is saying something completely different about the same religion, and that's without even getting into any one of the other dozen+ forms of the same religion, or without getting into any one of the other dozen+ religions.

But, the question is if could be a moral values as "killing and stealing is bad" without religion? How could someone who isn't aspiritual person to tell what's good and what's bad?