B
BlueMoose
Guest
Yes it is. But there wouldnt be jew haters without state of Israel, dont you think ?
More Israeli Land theft
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
not really.
B
BlueMoose
Guest
Why not found couple of other states, like Kurdistan ?
B
BlueMoose
Guest
-Explain.
weve tried that. didnt work.
B
BlueMoose
Guest
But Israel will be a success ? And care to explain why jews were to be hated without state of Israel ?
beacuse jew haters predated israel by a millennia or two?
B
BlueMoose
Guest
If I recall everything was fine and dandy before Nazis take over, if I recall right, to be a Jew is choose of religion, guess what, we have couple here too, even in parliament and no problem what so ever. I dont quite follow you, somekind apocalypse thing with Jerusalem involved ?
So we are agreed that there is no "peace process" on the American/Israeli side, that this is and is planned to continue as an oppression and military occupation of one people by another, and that the expropriation of lands from anyone is justified by observing that it increases the security of Israelis in the short run.
Will this logic also apply to expropriated lands formerly belonging to Lebanese, Syrians, etc ?
Will this logic also apply to expropriated lands formerly belonging to Lebanese, Syrians, etc ?
B
BlueMoose
Guest
Shaaait, Russia own pieces of our land, those frikin thieves, would US help us little to gain back Karelia where both my grandparents are from, damn ! 
Buffalo Roam
Registered Senior Member
Do a little research into the subject, there is a long history of hating Jews, wether in the Middle East, Europe, and even America, the Jews have been the whipping boy for every body who need someone else to blame for their problems.
B
BlueMoose
Guest
Yes, I know, thats because they were always isolating and not willing to assimilate, but there where places where they did get along just fine, I know my history, so save it.
There are many more groups than Jews whom are in the same position.
There are many more groups than Jews whom are in the same position.
Challenger78
Valued Senior Member
They're not anymore. This time they actually did do things they are accused for.
Besides, Just because they've been bullied, and abandoned by the West, It somehow gives them the right to go bully other people ?
Buffalo Roam
Registered Senior Member
And those People, tried to bully them in 1948? and ever since the Diaspora, yes we see how well the Moslems have treated Jews through out their history, Dhimmitude, jizya, murdered when ever a Moslem need to feel like a man, Palestinian is just another word for Arab, and they didn't own the land, they had no title or deed, most of the Land of Israel was Ottoman Crown Land, and the Ottomans sold the largest divestiture of that lands to the Jews, and gave them Title and Deed.
http://www.beki.org/landlaw.html
Intent and Provisions of the Land Laws
The Ottoman Land Code of 21 April 1858 defined five classes of land ownership: ملك milk, وقف waqf, ميري mīrī, متروك matrūk and موات mawāt. Milk is "land in unrestricted private ownership," land for which the raqaba (paramount ownership) is vested in the individual.1 What little milk there was in Palestine was mostly "plots of land which had at the time of distribution [by Muslim conquerors] been assigned to unbelievers...."2 Waqf includes land "dedicated to a religious purpose" — theoretically owned by God — and administered or held in trust by a stipulated party such as a religious council.3
For mīrī, matrūk and mawāt, the raqaba is vested in the hands of the state. Mīrī is cultivated or cultivatable land acquired for the state through conquest or through forfeiture of milk due to a failure of heirs. An individual could gain rights over mīrī land by cultivating it and paying taxes; but the state continued to regulate its transfer and improvement. The tenant's rights to mīrī were forfeited by failure to cultivate the land; such forfeited land is termed maḥlūl. In practice, neither the Ottomans nor the British ever repossessed maḥlūl.4 Mīrī included "by far the largest portion of the landed property in Palestine."5 (It should be noted that subsequent laws gradually extended the rights of mīrī tenure to approach those of milk.)6 Mīrī land could be converted by order of the sultan into matrūk maḥmiyya (property for general public use such as lakes or roads) or into matrūk murfaqa (property for use by a particular community such as market places and cemeteries).7
Mawāt is wasteland which an individual could (until 1858) turn into milk with the permission of the sultan and (until 1921) turn into mīrī by cultivating it for a given period of time and paying for it.8
It'll all be over when the primitive savages will accept the fundamental principle that Israel shouldn't be destroyed. Once that is accepted, the rest is just details.
However, the primitive savages are better at being fundamentalists than Israelis are. And there are far more of them. Try to change the opinion of a Hamas "gunman"... about anything, not just Israel... the results are pretty easy to predict.
It's a mindset. It's a cultural thing. It's the fixed fundamental reactionary nature of those people (not all... only the ones that determine what the direction is... the ones with the guns.)
Building (or giving up) a few buildings on the disputed land won't change a thing.
However, the primitive savages are better at being fundamentalists than Israelis are. And there are far more of them. Try to change the opinion of a Hamas "gunman"... about anything, not just Israel... the results are pretty easy to predict.
It's a mindset. It's a cultural thing. It's the fixed fundamental reactionary nature of those people (not all... only the ones that determine what the direction is... the ones with the guns.)
Building (or giving up) a few buildings on the disputed land won't change a thing.
Last edited:
Except for the 600 families now deprived of their farmland. Thats 600 more families with a greater reason to hate Israel.
They all add up, a family at a time.
A couple of the details are going to be troublesome, though.otheadp said:
One is, how big Israel is going to be. It's quite a bit bigger now than it was, and still growing.
Another is, what is going to happen to all the people who live and used to live where Israel wants to move in its own preferred citizenry. They are not likely to leave peacefully (people do get attached to the family farm, feel bad about their relatives now murdered, etc), and the South African Homeland or US Indian Reservation systems, although a step up from what is happening now, are even less likely to work in a country surrounded by desert and pre-occupied areas. They may be primitive savages, but they do find it easy to get college educations, money, political connections, and weapons training elsewhere, and there are millions of them.
Politics is all about compromise. When one side is willing to compromise and the other is absolute then there cannot be a political solution. Time and time again we've seen Israelis compromise (withdrawal from South Lebanon, withdrawal from Gaza, allowing the creation of an entity called the "Palestinian Authority" and arming it, offering to concede Jerusalem, etc. etc.) and no Israeli interests being met in return from the other side.
That absolutist primitive religious fanatic approach is what has been causing this.
When Sadat has embraced the idea that Israel is there to stay, he got the benefits: Sinai returned, and a whole lot more candy. His compromise was not committing genocide. Gee, thanks a lot. Israel's compromise was giving up of Sinai, and the moral right to hold on to that land as it was the spoils of war which were won fair and square. That's how all borders get drawn everywhere: with blood. Yes, including the peace-loving nations of Canada, New Zealand, Finland, Belgium, etc. At one time or another there has been blood shed to draw those borders.
Anyway, my main point: working out the details is a purely analytical exercise. Concessions, concessions, concessions. By both sides. But having the religious fundies in the Muslim world accept Israel's right to exist is a necessary precondition because all else flaws from that. If that is not achieved first, no "agreement" will hold water.
It's not an Israeli "demand", per se, (although it definitely should be... what I'm seeing today is that the bogus 'road map' charade is proceding as planned even though no such recognition has been taken place by the "Palestinian" masses). It is just a statement of logic.
Last edited:
exist as a Jewish state you mean. With no right of return for natives
And right now it is Israel breaking all human rights laws and building illegal settlements
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
And right now it is Israel breaking all human rights laws and building illegal settlements
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/