Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 3/23/06 09:34 AM, GBVrallyCI wrote: after reading this thread it has come to my knowlodge that anyone who supports the illegal Arab occupation of the Jewish and Christian Holy Land is absolutly insane. The Jews are the rightful rulers of Israel, not the Arabs. They have no real claim to legitamacy. Muslims have no reason being there. Anyone here who said Iran is a democracy...wow...and to the guy accusing us of being rascists, how ignroant can you get? You are an anti-semetic low life who has addmitted to being a nazi...

Well I don't agree with "Shit, our people have been here thousands of years ago, we want it back"

I do agree, however, on fighting for land and winning. The winners hold the chips, not the losers.

Israel kicked the crap out of palestine along with other arab countries. They fought for it, just like Canadians fought Americans for their land, like Rome fought for theirs, and so forth.

At 3/23/06 01:12 PM, MarkyX wrote: Canadians fought Americans for their land.

wtf!

At 3/23/06 01:17 PM, zeus_almighty wrote:

At 3/23/06 01:12 PM, MarkyX wrote: Canadians fought Americans for their land.

wtf!

Er I meant to say that Americans fought Canadians for their land. Lack of editing pwns me.

http://en.wikipedia...f_Canada#War_of_1812

At 3/23/06 01:20 PM, MarkyX wrote: Er I meant to say that Americans fought Canadians for their land. Lack of editing pwns me.

Oh thank god for a second there I thought I might of had to get my gun club together and get some sweet revenge.

At 3/23/06 01:23 PM, zeus_almighty wrote:

At 3/23/06 01:20 PM, MarkyX wrote: Er I meant to say that Americans fought Canadians for their land. Lack of editing pwns me.

Oh thank god for a second there I thought I might of had to get my gun club together and get some sweet revenge.

Not going to happen. We'll just our attractive women against you.

At 3/23/06 01:26 PM, MarkyX wrote: We'll just our attractive women against you.

?

At 3/22/06 06:23 PM, Fenrus1989 wrote:

In all fairness it's a Cannanite City. Christians have just as much of a Claim to the City as any Arab or Jew.

The Cannanite culture/kingdom/whatever does not exist. Therefore, it is ours. We took it. The arabs almost had it, but we took it back. It's ours.

This city is a Monument to all Abrahamic Religions and shouldn't be controlled by one Country.

Au contraire. I could apply that logic to, say, the Vatican.

At 3/23/06 01:26 PM, MarkyX wrote:

At 3/23/06 01:23 PM, zeus_almighty wrote:

At 3/23/06 01:20 PM, MarkyX wrote: Er I meant to say that Americans fought Canadians for their land. Lack of editing pwns me.

Oh thank god for a second there I thought I might of had to get my gun club together and get some sweet revenge.

Not going to happen. We'll just our attractive women against you.

Lol, he means that we'll send the hot western women wearing western clothing into the Arab countries.

At 3/21/06 06:26 PM, Mighty_Genghis wrote: the United States has become the de facto enabler of Israeli expansion in the Occupied Territories, making it complicit in the crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians. This situation undercuts Washington’s efforts to promote democracy abroad and makes it look hypocritical when it presses other states to respect human rights. US efforts to limit nuclear proliferation appear equally hypocritical given its willingness to accept Israel’s nuclear arsenal, which only encourages Iran and others to seek a similar capability.

I'm going to respond to this quickly. Click for Israeli soldiers murdering palestinians in cold blood. Caution it's gory.

At 3/23/06 01:12 PM, MarkyX wrote: They fought for it,

Is the winner always entitled to do whatever he wants with the lands he conquered and the people living in it? Stalin fought for Eastern Europe as well. Did that give him the full right to drain the economies of the countries that his armies occupied or was there still something immoral about his actions?

That's not what's happening in israel. Although here's a link for you lapis. Clicky

At 3/23/06 04:24 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: That's not what's happening in israel. Although here's a link for you lapis. Clicky

Did I say it was? His basic belief seemed to be: "the winner gets the spolis, and even when what he does with them is immoral, his actions are still justified". I was using basic deduction to see if this theory applied to other cases, so let the guy answer before making false assumptions. And although I don't have a link with a suitable wav-file ready for you, I'd suggest downloading the song "Sucks to be you" by Prozzak and playing it several times. That would be very approriate.

At 3/23/06 04:07 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote:

At 3/22/06 06:23 PM, Fenrus1989 wrote:

Au contraire. I could apply that logic to, say, the Vatican.

Did three relgions spring forth from the Vatican no.

Just Christianity and later Catholicism.

At 3/23/06 04:20 PM, lapis wrote:

At 3/23/06 01:12 PM, MarkyX wrote: They fought for it,

Is the winner always entitled to do whatever he wants with the lands he conquered and the people living in it? Stalin fought for Eastern Europe as well. Did that give him the full right to drain the economies of the countries that his armies occupied or was there still something immoral about his actions?

Difference between israel and stalin is Israel has done none of those. Yes, Stalin is *allowed* to fuck over his people. He is and was above the law of his country. Is it morally right? No, of course not.

You need to remember that palestines never owned land, it belonged to the british. It was a colony. It's like a landlord and the tenant. If the landlord wanted someone new, they can by all rights.

The jews aren't the ones who decided to suicide bomb or send young kids to do old man's deeds. It was the palestines.

The pathetic part is that the palestines had the entire middle east where they could've simply moved to. But no, due to their stubborn behavior and hatred for jews, they pretend to be a victim of the jewish crimes. In reality, they made the choice to be the victim.

And idiots like you fall for it. They voted in a terrorist government, send young kids full of life to an early grave, kill innocents who aren't even part of their little jihad, and yet you still defend them.

This is why people are waking up and realizing that Islam isn't a religion of peace. They have had a large history of violence and intolerance for others. They even fight amongst themselves (sunnis, for example) and threaten those who speak against Islan (Wafa Sultan).

http://www.memritv.o..p?ACT=S9&P1=1050

At 3/22/06 10:27 PM, Joodah wrote: we sent a message. is it our fault if they ignore it? nope.

Your a sick fucking terrorist supporting scum. I hope you realize just how much of an ass you are.

The Palestinians sent Israel repeated warnings they would kill them if they didnt leave their land. Israel ignored it. Does that make it justified you fucking fool?

'k, about what?

Of a warning. Thats like me saying Im going to shoot you after the bullet is in flight. Thats a cop out of responsibility, not a warning.

so ben gurion didn't do anything, and it's not his fault. your point?

He PLANNED it and knew about it. And I hold him just as responsible for their deaths as Begin. He could have warned the Brits an attack was planned on them. He didnt. Hes a terrorist and a murderer.

begin, however, was responsible. i didn't vote for him, and i didn't choose him for PM.

You claimed he wasnt mainstream. He clearly was. Your retarted.

You need to remember that palestines never owned land, it belonged to the british. It was a colony. It's like a landlord and the tenant. If the landlord wanted someone new, they can by all rights.

The US never owned any land, seeing as it belonged to the British at one point. It was a colony. Britain could do whatever it wanted to the colonies, and they could only bend over, right? No. The US did the same exact thing the Palestinians did -- they fought an imperialistic power for their freedom.

The jews aren't the ones who decided to suicide bomb or send young kids to do old man's deeds. It was the palestines.

No, the Jews were the ones who decided to make it state policy to kill Palestinians. Since 2000, only 123 Israeli children have been killed, but 716 Palestinian children have been killed. Only 1000 Israelies have been killed, but 3800 Palestinians have been killed. It isn't because of Palestinian terror attacks -- it is because of the Israeli military's state-condoned terror attacks. The Palestinians have to resort to suicide bombs because the Israelis have tanks and planes, and bomb indiscriminately with thme.

The pathetic part is that the palestines had the entire middle east where they could've simply moved to. But no, due to their stubborn behavior and hatred for jews, they pretend to be a victim of the jewish crimes. In reality, they made the choice to be the victim.

They had the entire Middle East to move to!? Most of the Palestinians either felt a strong attachment to their homes or had no money to move elsewhere. Unfortunately for them, the Jews were not a live-and-let-live kind of people. They shot Palestinians before they even got their own state, and continued to do so. They were the victims of Jewish crimes, and they tried to fight back.

And idiots like you fall for it. They voted in a terrorist government, send young kids full of life to an early grave, kill innocents who aren't even part of their little jihad, and yet you still defend them.

This is why people are waking up and realizing that Islam isn't a religion of peace. They have had a large history of violence and intolerance for others. They even fight amongst themselves (sunnis, for example) and threaten those who speak against Islan (Wafa Sultan).

http://www.memritv.o..p?ACT=S9&P1=1050

At 3/23/06 07:36 PM, Begoner wrote: No, the Jews were the ones who decided to make it state policy to kill Palestinians. Since 2000, only 123 Israeli children have been killed, but 716 Palestinian children have been killed. Only 1000 Israelies have been killed, but 3800 Palestinians have been killed. It isn't because of Palestinian terror attacks -- it is because of the Israeli military's state-condoned terror attacks. The Palestinians have to resort to suicide bombs because the Israelis have tanks and planes, and bomb indiscriminately with thme.

What is your major malfunction?

Looking at those numbers tells you NOTHING. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PALESTINIAN TERRORIST KILL PALESTINIANS?! Do you even deign to think that, maybe, some of these "children" were terrorists? Perhaps this figure includes all persons from 0 to 18...and a 17 year old who blows him/herself up is NOT A CHILD. A minor, yes, but NOT a child.

The 1:3 kill ratio shows that Israel is very sucesssful in defending itself against terror. 1000 israelis killed, easily 3/4 by terror, but 3000 palestinians, far too many were terrorists. Not all, but far, far too many. It's hard to identify who was a terrorist in a body count, since terrorists, unlike legitimate combatants, don't identify themselves.

This is why people are waking up and realizing that Islam isn't a religion of peace. They have had a large history of violence and intolerance for others.

That's NOT TRUE! During the Middle Ages, Jews found refuge among the Islamic nations!

They even fight amongst themselves (sunnis, for example) and threaten those who speak against Islan (Wafa Sultan).

http://www.memritv.o..p?ACT=S9&P1=1050

Love that video! Makes me so proud to be a westerner!

At 3/23/06 07:36 PM, Begoner wrote:

They had the entire Middle East to move to!? Most of the Palestinians either felt a strong attachment to their homes or had no money to move elsewhere.

Ok. If the Arabs had accepted the 1947 partition plan like the Jews did, there would have been NO REFUGEE PROBLEM. The fault rests with the arabs. The supposed deportation that occured in Tiberias and Haifa, for two examples, is bullshit. They were in the Jewish partition. Here's another example: "The U.S. Consul-General in Haifa, Aubrey Lippincott, wrote on April 22, 1948, for example, that "local mufti-dominated Arab leaders" were urging "all Arabs to leave the city, and large numbers did so." (http://www.jewishvir..ce/myths/mf14.html#
c)

Most of the Arabs left of their OWN accord. You want me to back this up? Tell me, and I will.

This is why people are waking up and realizing that Islam isn't a religion of peace. They have had a large history of violence and intolerance for others. They even fight amongst themselves (sunnis, for example) and threaten those who speak against Islan (Wafa Sultan).

http://www.memritv.o..p?ACT=S9&P1=1050

Sorry, this wasn't you who said this.

http://www.pbs.org/w..itage/timeline3.html

this is a timeline of the Jews history in Israel.this should shed some light on some arguments.

According to the timeline the Jews lived in Israel for about 1,000 years on and off because of repeated invasions by other empires.When the arabs arrive in the 630s they live their peacefully with Jews for the most part for another 1,000 years.Then the trouble starts with the re establishement of Israel.

At 3/23/06 07:36 PM, Begoner wrote: No, the Jews were the ones who decided to make it state policy to kill Palestinians. Since 2000, only 123 Israeli children have been killed, but 716 Palestinian children have been killed. Only 1000 Israelies have been killed, but 3800 Palestinians have been killed. It isn't because of Palestinian terror attacks -- it is because of the Israeli military's state-condoned terror attacks. The Palestinians have to resort to suicide bombs because the Israelis have tanks and planes, and bomb indiscriminately with thme.

All I can say is where the fuck do you get this Bullshit and how do you believe it?

Next, if you look population wise, about 3-4 million Palestinians were driven from their homes. Hitler killed 6 million, (took them from their homes) and countries all across the Middle East and Africa and Europe have been throwing out Jews since the Romans threw the Jews out of Israel. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, you ignorant, nazi scumbag.

Next, if you look population wise, about 3-4 million Palestinians were driven from their homes. Hitler killed 6 million, (took them from their homes) and countries all across the Middle East and Africa and Europe have been throwing out Jews since the Romans threw the Jews out of Israel.

So you are saying that two wrongs make a right? The Jews were persecuted so the Palestinians have to pay? What if Rwandan refugees got the state of Texas because they were slaughtered in a bloody genocide? Would that be fair? The Palestinians did nothing to warrant having their land taken away.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, you ignorant, nazi scumbag.

My ignorance pales in comparison to yours, and I'm not Nazi. Nazis are right-wing, like you.

At 3/23/06 08:12 PM, Begoner wrote:

So you are saying that two wrongs make a right? The Jews were persecuted so the Palestinians have to pay?

The Palestinians weren't PAYING for anything! The British had the land, they were willing to partition it to our disadvantage. We wanted a little slice, shows that piece of evidence, but the Arabs wanted it ALL so they said no. We wanted our bit of land, our TINY BIT, so when we declared our independence, they attacked. We won. The Palestinians could have had their own state, or they could move to Jordan (which has a palestinian majority). They left of their own accord.

At 3/23/06 07:35 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

Your a sick fucking terrorist supporting scum. I hope you realize just how much of an ass you are.

....

The Palestinians sent Israel repeated warnings they would kill them if they didnt leave their land. Israel ignored it. Does that make it justified you fucking fool?

no. it's not their land. their homeland is in jordan.

Of a warning. Thats like me saying Im going to shoot you after the bullet is in flight. Thats a cop out of responsibility, not a warning.

no, that was enough time to get the people out, but not enough to get the documents and materials.

He PLANNED it and knew about it. And I hold him just as responsible for their deaths as Begin. He could have warned the Brits an attack was planned on them. He didnt. Hes a terrorist and a murderer.

THE BRITS WERE WARNED. and he backed off at the last minute. lets say you wanted to kill someone, right? and you make a plan. and you get everything ready. sooo. at the last minute you chicken out. and now, your friend/accomplice/whatever grabs the weapon and kills the person. is it your fault? no.

You claimed he wasnt mainstream. He clearly was. Your retarted.

that may be, but i know how to spell retarded.

The US never owned any land, seeing as it belonged to the British at one point. It was a colony. Britain could do whatever it wanted to the colonies, and they could only bend over, right? No. The US did the same exact thing the Palestinians did -- they fought an imperialistic power for their freedom.

Only the US won. Palestines lost. Next.

No, the Jews were the ones who decided to make it state policy to kill Palestinians. Since 2000, only 123 Israeli children have been killed, but 716 Palestinian children have been killed. Only 1000 Israelies have been killed, but 3800 Palestinians have been killed. It isn't because of Palestinian terror attacks -- it is because of the Israeli military's state-condoned terror attacks. The Palestinians have to resort to suicide bombs because the Israelis have tanks and planes, and bomb indiscriminately with thme.

They asked for it after decades of suicide bombs and having several arab countries trying to invade Israel. You push someone enough times, they will push back.

They had the entire Middle East to move to!? Most of the Palestinians either felt a strong attachment to their homes or had no money to move elsewhere. Unfortunately for them, the Jews were not a live-and-let-live kind of people. They shot Palestinians before they even got their own state, and continued to do so. They were the victims of Jewish crimes, and they tried to fight back.

The jews had to be aggressive because the palestines kept wiping out families and bloodlines from the jews after years of bullshit with them.

Funny you mention when Jews aren't "live-andlet-live" kind of people, considering that one of their government officials is an arab and do let arabs by. Jews are the ones setting up checkpoints to keep the crazies out.

At 3/23/06 05:35 PM, MarkyX wrote: Difference between israel and stalin is Israel has done none of those.

Like I told mackid, that's not the issue. The issue is whether or not "he/she fought for it" gives the winner a justification to do whatever he wants with the spoils. At least we agree about Stalin's actions being immoral. The decisions of both the British and the Jewish immigrants were immoral too; they either gave away or claimed land in which other people had been the majority for hundreds of years, which is immoral in my book.

The British partly wrote the Balfour declaration to gain American favour by the way, which brings us back to the original topic: the power of the pro-Israeli lobby in the US.

You need to remember that palestines never owned land, it belonged to the british. It was a colony. It's like a landlord and the tenant. If the landlord wanted someone new, they can by all rights.

Your analogy fails since landlords in Western societies either purchased their land or received it from family members, friends or the state for some reason. The landlord here, Britain, conquered the land. It's like a man barging into a house supervised by a man who the invader has a fight with, while carrying a shotgun and claiming the land as his own. Now it's still basic geopolitics if the new owner only administers the land, but when he decides to kick the inhabitants out to let his friend move in he's committing a crime, a moral crime that is. If the US would for some reason decide to purge Iraq of it's current inhabitants to make way for an independent Gypsy state then the same reasoning would apply.

The jews aren't the ones who decided to suicide bomb or send young kids to do old man's deeds. It was the palestines.

You're right, it were the Israelis who decided to provoke the Palestinians time and time again until they had no other options than to either bend over and take it in the ass or start with suicide bombings and sending young kids to do old man's deeds.

The pathetic part is that the palestines had the entire middle east where they could've simply moved to.

Why move away from land that's yours rather than keep fighting? Why not stand up for yourself and your people? And do you know how welcome the Palestinian refugees were to the Jordanian authorities, for example? Not too much, to put it lightly. By the way, the Jewish would-be Israelis could have also migrated to New York or French Polynesia. Your point is moot.

But no, due to their stubborn behavior and hatred for jews, they pretend to be a victim of the jewish crimes. In reality, they made the choice to be the victim.

Haha, that's a good one. They chose to be victims. I bet a representative of the Palestinian Arabs sent a letter somewhere before the first Aliyah to the Hovevei Zion inviting them to start some shit in their country. "My dear proto-Zionist chums, as the Levant has been unnaturally peaceful for some time now we cordially invite you to migrate to our land and claim an independent state there. We thrive on hate and we have no real enemies anymore. Yours truly, Palestine."

If the Aliyah migrants hadn't been as numerous as they were and if they hadn't claimed an independent country in Palestine then there would be no conflict like we have today, period. The Jewish migrants chose to fuck the Palestinian Arabs over and the Arabs only had the choice to get fucked or to fight back. Since they lost the fight, they would have been victims either way.

And idiots like you fall for it. They voted in a terrorist government, send young kids full of life to an early grave, kill innocents who aren't even part of their little jihad, and yet you still defend them.

Like I said before, the Israeli government is also guilty of terrorism. Sending 15-year olds to fight battles is sick, I agree, but we only have nine confirmed cases of minors carrying out suicide bombings in the entire second intifada and 30 deaths of minors related to military activities, so I'd still call them incidents. And if you hate groups who deliberately target civilians for their war effort then you must have a strong dislike for the Allies during WW2 as well.

I condemn unprovoked theft of land and when the victims stand up for themselves then I sympathise with them, and if that involves dirty methods then I do not condone these acts, but I can understand partaking in them if there are no other real options to make a serious stand. If that makes me a idiot then you have a pretty warped view on idiocy.

This is why people are waking up and realizing that Islam isn't a religion of peace. They have had a large history of violence and intolerance for others. They even fight amongst themselves (sunnis, for example) and threaten those who speak against Islan (Wafa Sultan).

Pffft, have you ever looked at the Christian history of violence and intolerance? And this has nothing to do with Islam or religion in general, but rather with people taking over land that belongs to others, whether they are Sunnis, Jews, Taoists or whatever.

At 3/23/06 07:36 PM, Begoner wrote: response

Cool, thanks.

At 3/23/06 07:48 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: Ok. If the Arabs had accepted the 1947 partition plan like the Jews did, there would have been NO REFUGEE PROBLEM.

I want your purse, so when I offer you to divide it equally and you refuse, it's your fault for not cooperating, right?

By the way, read this. I could always only name Lydda and Ramle (turns out that al-Lydd is a town in the al-Ramla distict) as cases of expelling the Arab population but now I have an entire list to link to. Whoopie.

At 3/24/06 06:58 AM, lapis wrote: Pffft, have you ever looked at the Christian history of violence and intolerance?

There was none. All those "Christian" terrorists were all Catholics and Calvanists - who aren't real Christians by the way.

At 3/23/06 10:18 PM, Joodah wrote: ....

What you have to say? You do support terrorism and the killing of innocents.

no. it's not their land. their homeland is in jordan.

By that reasoning, what justification did those MAINSTREAM Jews have to attack BRITISH land? It wasnt their land. It was terrorism.

no, that was enough time to get the people out, but not enough to get the documents and materials.

You try verifying the message, delaying the message to the correct authorities, and then evacuating a major hotel in 25 minutes, fool, and then you tell me if its feasible.

A British officer standing nearby, one Major Mackintosh, became suspicious of this group of Arabs and began to ask questions, but was suddenly gunned down by a member of the Jewish gang and subsequently died. A policeman stationed at the tradesman's entrance suffered a similar fate when he challenged the Jewish terrorists. Both victims were unarmed. A gun battle soon began between the terrorist and guards during which time the Jews ignited the fuse and bolted from the building as the alarm was given. As they ran several were shot and wounded by guards, but most managed to make good their escape. There was no time to evacuate the building and the charge exploded with devastating effect. Many were killed instantly as the whole wing of the building collapsed about them, others were trapped and many more injured.
Sure doesnt seem to me like these terrorists ever had any good intentions.

THE BRITS WERE WARNED. and he backed off at the last minute.

Hes still a murderer and a terrorist. Its not like this is the only action he ever took as part of the Jewish terrorists trying to get independence.

lets say you wanted to kill someone, right? and you make a plan. and you get everything ready. sooo. at the last minute you chicken out. and now, your friend/accomplice/whatever grabs the weapon and kills the person. is it your fault? no.

LOL your an accomplice to murder fool.

that may be, but i know how to spell retarded.

OH SNAP. I like how you dodged my claim though. Nice.

I want your purse, so when I offer you to divide it equally and you refuse, it's your fault for not cooperating, right?

Techinically that's how some countries work, including Canada and United States. It's called Taxes.

Pffft, have you ever looked at the Christian history of violence and intolerance? And this has nothing to do with Islam or religion in general, but rather with people taking over land that belongs to others, whether they are Sunnis, Jews, Taoists or whatever.

Those were catholics, and even so, the most religions have a blackeye.

We are talking about today though. Christians aren't the ones burning embassies or sending kids to blow themselves up, the muslims are.

Your analogy fails since landlords in Western societies either purchased their land or received it from family members, friends or the state for some reason. The landlord here, Britain, conquered the land. It's like a man barging into a house supervised by a man who the invader has a fight with, while carrying a shotgun and claiming the land as his own. Now it's still basic geopolitics if the new owner only administers the land, but when he decides to kick the inhabitants out to let his friend move in he's committing a crime, a moral crime that is. If the US would for some reason decide to purge Iraq of it's current inhabitants to make way for an independent Gypsy state then the same reasoning would apply.

A moral crime or not, the palestines lost their land. In the world of politics and countries, there is no 'fair rules' to follow. America doesn't reduce it's army to balance against the enemies, it gets bigger. Same goes with other countries.

And like every game of war and politics, there is always a loser. Palestines are the loser. Instead of cooperating, they try to take everyone out. If I was in a situation where my country lost and no real hope of winning, I would give peace a chance. Palestines don't want to give that chance.

You're right, it were the Israelis who decided to provoke the Palestinians time and time again until they had no other options than to either bend over and take it in the ass or start with suicide bombings and sending young kids to do old man's deeds.

The israelis had to provoke the palestinians because palestinians are the ones who started the problems.

Here's a food for thought: Were they any suicide bombs in the concentration camps or small jewish boys told it's a good thing to die during world war 2? No. Jews have been harassed and assaulted throughout history and even today, are often picked for some conspiracy theories (example, this thread). I just find it total bullshit that when they try to offer peace or have a place in the world, there is some sort of big conspiracy behind it or everyone is against them. Am I the only one who thinks that refusing an offering a peace over blowing yourself is a bad idea?

Why move away from land that's yours rather than keep fighting? Why not stand up for yourself and your people? And do you know how welcome the Palestinian refugees were to the Jordanian authorities, for example? Not too much, to put it lightly. By the way, the Jewish would-be Israelis could have also migrated to New York or French Polynesia. Your point is moot.

First of all, they don't have a chance. The jews are better equipped, better trained, and established the only decent tourist spot in the middle east. As I said before, if it doesn't look like a real hope of winning and the enemy is willing to make peace, I rather take that offer then blow myself up.

At 3/23/06 08:12 PM, Begoner wrote: Nazis are right-wing, like you.

Actually, the nazis are more liberal/democrat than they are conservative/republican.

Here are some facts to chew on:

Nazis were famous for burning huge piles of books that contained views that were contrary from theirs.
College liberals burn (and steal) huge piles of conservative newspapers because they contain views that were contrary from theirs.

Hitler, the penultimate nazi, was a Vegetarian who believed in animal “rights”.
Most (if not all) vegetarian and animal “rights” activists are avowed democrats.

NAZI stands for the National “Socialist” German “Worker’s party “.
“Socialists” always vote democrat, which, incidentally, is often referred to as the “Worker’s party”.

The Nazis hated Jews, killed Jews and thought they should be wiped off the face of the earth.
Liberals support Palestinians, who hate Jews, kill Jews and think they should be wiped off the face of the earth.

The Nazis had Reni Riefenstahl to make blatant propaganda for him that masqueraded as film.
The Democrats have Michael Moore to make blatant propaganda for them that masquerades as film.

Nazis had the “Hitler Youth” program to indoctrinate impressionable young minds.
Democrats have college professors (90% of whom consider themselves liberal) to indoctrinate young minds.

Hitler had a seething hatred for Judeo/Christian vaiues (love thy neighbor and turn the other cheek).
Most (if not all) liberals also have a seething hatred for Judeo/Christian values.

Hitler was a stong supporter of abortion.
Liberals are strong supporters of abortion.

Many of the top Nazis were homosexuals.
Homosexuals vote overwhelmingly Democrat.

Hitler was a strong believer in "white supremacy" and considered all other races to be inferior.
The Democrats elected Robert Byrd (a member of the Ku Klux Klan - one of the largest white supremacist movement in America) into the Senate
The majority of Democrats voted against the Civil Rights Act.
President Franklin Roosevelt (Democrat) detained Japanese American citizens in prison camps.
President Andrew Jackson (Democrat) relocated thousands (if not millions) of Native Americans into "reservations".

Without a doubt, Adolf Hitler, with his anti-Israel, anti-Christian, pro-animal rights, pro-government intrusion would find success as a modern day liberal.

Facts are stubborn things, aren't they?

At 3/24/06 11:33 AM, omgwtfbbqsauce wrote:

Holy fuck. This has GOT to be one of the most retarded things I've seen in my days on the Newgounds BBS. I can't even be bothered to respond to the bulk of your "points". If someone else wants to tear them apart, be my guest.

Hitler, the penultimate nazi, was a Vegetarian who believed in animal “rights”.
Most (if not all) vegetarian and animal “rights” activists are avowed democrats.

Hitler loved sausages. Seriously, do some research. His austerity was exaggerated for propaganda purposes.

NAZI stands for the National “Socialist” German “Worker’s party “.
“Socialists” always vote democrat, which, incidentally, is often referred to as the “Worker’s party”.

The German Democratic Republic was pretty undemocratic. Calling myself a saint doesn't make me one. Hitler's policies had little, very little to do with Socialism, which explains why most of his opponents in Germany were leftists.

Many of the top Nazis were homosexuals.
Homosexuals vote overwhelmingly Democrat.

Do you have any fucking idea how many homosexuals were murdered under the Nazi reign? Suggestion: pick up a history book instead of copying indoctrinating bullshit from whatever revisionist websites you browse through.

At 3/24/06 11:05 AM, MarkyX wrote: Techinically that's how some countries work, including Canada and United States. It's called Taxes.

When you pay taxes, you invest it in entities which provide necessary services normal corporations can't or shouldn't supply, like defense or infrastructure, for the better of the collective. I however don't want half of mackid's purse so I can spend the money for the sake of making both our lives more pleasant, I want it for my own sake. That's a fundamental difference between a citizen paying taxes and a Palestinian "paying" half of his homeland to immigrants. The immigrants wouldn't have done anything with that land that would have been of any interest to the Palestinians, apart from a tiny coincidental boost in trade and industry maybe. They wanted to have it for their own, the same way a common mugger wants a purse.

Those were catholics, and even so, the most religions have a blackeye.

We are talking about today though. Christians aren't the ones burning embassies or sending kids to blow themselves up, the muslims are.

One could argue that terrorists aren't real Muslims either. Like Sura 18:74, where Moses condemns the killing of an innocent young boy, calling it horrendous. Or Sura 5:32 for example: when someone slays an innocent man it's as if he slew the whole of mankind. So if Catholics don't represent all Christians, then neither do terrorists represent all Muslims. A peaceful person could easily adhere to Islam, making Islam a religion of peace for him. The relationship between violence and Islam we see right now is correlational, not causal.

And like I said: religion has little to do with this particular problem. Most of the Palestinian resistance throughout the past few decades was secular, only after the islamist Hamas and the Islamic Jihad grew in importance did religion become a part of the problem. But religion isn't the cause or the solution to this issue.

A moral crime or not, the palestines lost their land. In the world of politics and countries, there is no 'fair rules' to follow.

That's pretty nihilist. There are basic moral rules every nation should follow. Claiming or giving away the land of others is immoral and that should have been clear back in 1948, when Imperialism was declining.

If I was in a situation where my country lost and no real hope of winning, I would give peace a chance.

Let's hypothetically say Russia invaded your country. You'd stand by idly even after you were expelled at gunpoint to make way for a new Chechen state, and had to spend the next few decades in a refugee camp in the Northern part of Baffin Island? Or if you were allowed to keep your house, but had to watch how Russian forces roll in every now and then to bulldoze the house of someone who was related to a resistance member or raze some buildings crucial to the local economy? I'd personally get pretty pissed.

The israelis had to provoke the palestinians because palestinians are the ones who started the problems.

How do you start a problem by complaining when other people want your land, the land in which your grandparents and their grandparents and their grandparents had been a vast majority? The Palestinians only retaliated, nothing more.

Here's a food for thought: Were they any suicide bombs in the concentration camps or small jewish boys told it's a good thing to die during world war 2?

I'll narrow this down to suicide bombings, since I've stated before that the use of children for military purposes is not on a significant scale and I don't condone it either.

Because the camp inhabitants couldn't get their hands on explosives? And for that matter, how about the Warsaw ghetto uprising or the Sonderkommando revolts in Auschwitz-Birkenau and Treblinka? That was also a form of suicide, as there was no real chance of winning.

Most comparisons between Palestinians and camp inhabitants are ridiculous, but when you get fucked, you have the moral right to stand up for yourself. A lot of people prefer dying like a man over living dishonoured and although I'm not in such a position right now, I can certainly sympathise.

some conspiracy theories (example, this thread).

I'm not sure about the motives of Ghenghis, but this thread is not a big conspiracy theory per se. After all, there is a powerful pro-Israeli lobby in the US.