Israel passes 'Nation State' law enshrining Jewish supremacy

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by Woogs, Jul 19, 2018.

  1. Woogs

    Woogs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    Messages:
    8,382
    Likes Received:
    2,556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1. So you favor forced relocation, i.e. ethnic cleansing? Good to know.

    2. So take some of Egypt.

    3. Blue Helmets don't 'defend' anyone. They are peacekeepers only

    4. Rest easy; Palestine is fast disappearing. This new law will help speed things up.
     
  2. SkullKrusher

    SkullKrusher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Messages:
    5,032
    Likes Received:
    2,137
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    [​IMG]

    God's will be done Glory Hallelujah. Long Live Israel
     
  3. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    19,292
    Likes Received:
    7,606
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Such paraphrasing is sure sign of a loser!
     
  4. Woogs

    Woogs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    Messages:
    8,382
    Likes Received:
    2,556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope ..... just cleared up your wordplay.

    Jordan, known as Trans-Jordan in the original British mandate, was always on the eastern bank of the Jordan river. Palestine, known as .... Palestine (whould'a thought) by the same British mandate, was on the western bank.
     
  5. Pisa

    Pisa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    4,157
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Wrong.

    Jordan didn't always exist. It was created by the British, who allowed the Hashemite tribe from the Arabian Peninsula to make for themselves a kingdom there in the early 20s. Jordan became independent in 1946.

    Palestine stretched on both banks of the river Jordan, and it wasn't a country, but a geographical region. Just like the Roman province Pannonia. Or have you ever heard of a Pannonian state and a Pannonian nation?

    Lotter's map of Palestine, 18th century:
    Terra Sancta sive Palæstina exhibens no folum Regna vetera Iuda et Israel in fuas XII Tribus diftincta, fed etiam eorundem diverfarum ætatum conditionem et facta in Sacris Paginis idicata.

    [​IMG]
    https://www.loc.gov/resource/g7500.ct000391/?r=0.08,0.248,1.352,0.514,0

    By the way, Arabs didn't call the region Palestine before Balfour. Bilad al-Sham was the Arabic name for the whole area where Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Israel are today.
     
  6. Woogs

    Woogs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    Messages:
    8,382
    Likes Received:
    2,556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I specifically cited the British mandate when using the terms I used, which your post agrees with.

    Should I have been more specific? Is it not clear the time frame I was referring to?
     
  7. Pisa

    Pisa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    4,157
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Still wrong.

    The original British Mandate didn't provide for an Arab country in the area, only for a Jewish homeland. The decision to create a Jewish homeland was made at the San Remo Conference.

    Palestine stretched on both sides of the Jordan river irrespective of any mandate, being a geographical region, not a country.
     
  8. Woogs

    Woogs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    Messages:
    8,382
    Likes Received:
    2,556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're speaking, as you say, irrespective of any mandate, while I was speaking with respect to the British mandate.

    If you have some need to post this history, use someone else as your sounding board. As it is, this is a matter of apples and oranges.
     
  9. free man

    free man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,984
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just like England Denmard Iceland Argentina Costa Rica Norway Greece Poland and many others...
     
  10. Pisa

    Pisa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    4,157
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Choosing to ignore history might have unexpected consequences for the validity of your claims. I've noticed that anti-Zionists usually pick and choose a certain point in time for the beginning of their own historical timeline, treating past events as irrelevant.

    Back to the British Mandate: have you ever read it? The document of the Mandate is still valid, you know. With respect to this Mandate, the creation of Jordan and the redefining of Palestine as the territory between the sea and the Jordan river are both illegal under international law, making any reference to the changes made by the British in the area debatable.

    I find this particular article of the Mandate...how shall I put it...well, enlightening regarding the OP:
    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp
     
  11. Cheddar

    Cheddar Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2016
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Notwithstanding your ridiculous level of cherry-picking, all Art 7 confirms is that Palestine existed (and, ergo, still does) and, consequently, all permanent residents, regardless of their religious leanings, could take up Palestinian citizenship. Which also confirms that all people, including Jews, that reside in Palestine but not in the original (i.e.1948) 'Israel' are, in fact, Palestinian.

    I don't know about you, but I've never heard of anyone being a citizen of a non-country.
     
  12. Injeun

    Injeun Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    12,833
    Likes Received:
    5,963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Language, homeland, capital, Jewish holidays, etc. We already know all these things to be true. So what's the problem?
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2018
  13. Injeun

    Injeun Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    12,833
    Likes Received:
    5,963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    BS and nothing to do with the topic.
     
  14. slackercruster

    slackercruster Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    509
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OP...it comes under the auspices of...might makes right.
     
  15. Injeun

    Injeun Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    12,833
    Likes Received:
    5,963
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not true. While the debt of appreciation may be owed to white Christians(founding Fathers) for this country. That which they established, applies to all Americans of every race and religion. What I find curious about this country is the concept upon which it is based, that there is one God from whom we all spring, and which is the essence of our equality in freedom. It is a superior and genius concept. As for Israels new law. I am glad for them. Everyone should always respect and honor God and their relationship with him. He has made them an example and blessed the whole earth thru them.
     
  16. Pisa

    Pisa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    4,157
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I aimed for ridiculous level of cherry picking, glad I made it. I could, of course, enter into a general debate about the document of the Mandate, with long digressions about specifics of each article, but ridiculous level of cherry picking allowed me to avoid off topic. There are certain situations where cherry picking is required, like the need to avoid warnings from moderators for lengthy unnecessary off topic.

    The geographical area called Palestine exists irrespective of the presence of humans on its territory, just like the geographical area called Scandinavia exists irrespective of the presence of various nations on its territory. Naming geographical areas based on certain criteria is one of humans' many ways to organize the space around them using easily recognizable symbols.

    The existence of a geographical area called Palestine is not proof of existence of a country called Palestine, inhabited by a non-Jewish nation called Palestinian, on the territory of the geographical area called Palestine, just as the existence of a geographical area called Scandinavia is not proof of existence of a country called Scandinavia, inhabited by a Scandinavian nation, on the territory of the geographical area called Scandinavia.

    Shall we explore further other geographical areas, to avoid another ridiculous level of cherry picking? Hmmm...you decide.

    Article 7 of the document of the Mandate is not about who can or who can't receive Palestinian citizenship. It's about facilitating settlement of Jews in Palestine via a nationality law. Since the document of the Mandate is still valid, the nationality law the British avoided then like plague is perfectly legal under international law. More than legal, it's compulsory under international law.

    Please note that, according to Article 2, the mandatory shall be responsible for "safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion", but political rights are afforded only to Jews.

    Political rights were afforded to Arabs in the rest of the former Ottoman territory: Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and later Jordan.
     
  17. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    18,965
    Likes Received:
    3,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female


    Wow! Who thought that one up? Civil Rights are "the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality"

    https://www.google.com/search?q=what+are+ciil+rights&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b

    Now I accept that that is what many Zionists always wanted and I accept that this new law is making that official but no, that was not what the mandate was about. It was an act of illegal brutality on the Palestinians all brought about because the Brits believed that 'Jews' ruled the world and would bring the US into WW1 and win it for the Brits. Churchill said they made good on their promise. According to Lilienthal they thought it was such a massive psychological tool that they dropped leaflets over Germany and her allies letting them know that a deal had been made with the Jews inferring they would not win the war. Apparently Germans also believed Jews ruled the world so would likely come to this conclusion too. (see What Price Israel by Alfred Lilienthal)

    As far as claiming any legitimacy to the Mandate I would keep very quiet about that if I was you as it did not follow the Mandates rules.

    https://www.ampalestine.org/palesti...ndate/zionist-connection-to-palestine-mandate



     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2018
  18. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Care to source that them countries are meant for 1 specific ethnicity and their culture.. by law?
     
  19. jimbo1

    jimbo1 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2018
    Messages:
    1,317
    Likes Received:
    359
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    He can't and he won't.
     
  20. jimbo1

    jimbo1 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2018
    Messages:
    1,317
    Likes Received:
    359
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    You're supremacist beliefs are showing...
     
  21. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,681
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We were looking at the end of WW1, not WW2. You're guessing.
     
  22. Pisa

    Pisa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    4,157
    Likes Received:
    1,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Alexa, civil rights of citizens and political rights of a nation are two different things. Algerian citizens in France have all the civil rights granted by French law, but political power is afforded only to French citizens, not to Algerians in general.

    In the particular case of Palestine, political power should - but wasn't (Britain is called the Perfidious Albion for a reason) - have been afforded to Jews because Palestine was destined to become the Jewish national home, but within this framework all the citizens of Palestine were granted civil rights, including the right to participate in the political process. Just like Algerian citizens in France can't grant Algeria political power in France, but they can participate themselves in the political process, neither could the Arabs citizens of Palestine have granted Arabs in general political power in Palestine. This is the meaning of the two articles I mentioned.

    Arabs were granted political power in four brand new countries, by the way.

    I couldn't care less about Lilienthal's opinions. I just wonder if he mentions the 100,000 German Jews serving in the German army during WWI.

    Professor Henry Catan seems to ignore the San Remo Conference, of which the Mandate was a consequence. The League of Nations confirmed the Mandate, but did not grant it. The San Remo Conference granted the Mandate. I find it unsettling that anti-Zionists, who claim to base their arguments on an all-encompassing - albeit somewhat elusive, as we're never told the specifics - international law, fail to recognize international law when it contradicts their premises. Treaties between states generate international law. The San Remo Conference is such a treaty, hence the document of the Mandate, as a result of this treaty, is international law.

    The author of the article you quoted based his arguments on premises that have yet to be proved:

    1. History completely ignores the existence of a non-Jewish Palestinian nation. From the 6th century BC, when Philistines disappear from history, until the end of WWI, there's no evidence whatsoever for a non-Jewish nation in Palestine. This ghostly nation isn't mentioned in any known document, be it historical, cartographic, commercial, religious, or any other type. There are no ancient or medieval Palestinian coins, no Palestinian palaces for rulers, no Palestinian art, no Palestinian places of worship, no Palestinian famous poets or philosophers. The complete absence of even a shred of historical evidence for the existence of an ancient non-Jewish Palestinian nation is more than weird, taking into account that this troubled region has been coveted by many, conquered by many, visited and described by many. Where's the proof that such a non-Jewish Palestinian nation inhabited - and called home - Palestine from time immemorial?

    2. Palestine was a country at the end of WWI. No, it wasn't, but feel free to prove otherwise.
     
  23. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,457
    Likes Received:
    14,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    dude, in a recent thread you called black people "pavement apes" and "street monkeys".

    so dont talk.
     
  24. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,457
    Likes Received:
    14,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Israel has many citizens who are not Jews.

    Just as Iran, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan have citizens who are not Muslims or Arabs.
     
  25. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,457
    Likes Received:
    14,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nevermind the fact that Federal law allows racial/ethnic discrimination in housing under certain circumstances
     

Share This Page