How pure are the Jews? Does 65% 'Judean' sound about right?

Wrong.
Egypt occupied gaza. they just didnt' try to annex it like Hussein with Jordan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Gaza_Strip_by_Egypt

I'm surprised that you agree that the palestinians and their arab supporters have consistently placed the destruction of Israeli over their nationalist desires.

Huh? I am totally unaware of ANY country where the conquered and occupied dictated the terms of ending the occupation.
Even when negotiating an end to colonialism, the colony didn't dictate the terms.

Yes they always seem to, don't they? I can see a run of bad luck and poor decisions and say okay its a phase, but when it appears as tho its a run of bad luck and poor decisions that have been regular and consistent over multiple generations, ya gotta wonder if perhaps there are deeper root causes within their clan cultural.

 

They are telling us we can't call out bigotry

 

OK. I understood that Gaza was governed by an Arab League-appointed administration. I also thought that Egypt expressly avowed any wish to acquire Gaza but was the overseer until a long-term solution was found. If that is what you call "occupy", then it was a very benign occupation. Nothing remotely like Israel's "occupation" of Gaza and the West Bank.

I certainly did not mean what you wrote there. I am absolutely sure that Joe the Plumber Palestinian would like to have his own country, to have clinics that don't get bombed, schools that are not blitzed with white phosphorus, non-corrupt administrations, access to soccer balls and elastoplast, ability to leave their own country without someone in an adjacent country dictating whether he can or cannot, fishermen who are allowed to fish in their on territorial water ...... all of that long before they want the destruction of Israel.

What I was indicating is that, particularly Jordan and Fatah, were after their own interests rather than those of the Palestinian people. But not the Palestinian people themselves. Not the guy who still wants to tend his olive groves without some settler tearing them out.

Go tell that to the Indians, to the ANC in South Africa, to ZAPLA in Zimbabwe ..... and to dozens of other countries, because you are dead wrong. Many colonialists left with their tails between their legs. Also the Afrikaners, Ian Smith in Rhodesia; Indonesia in Timor. Southern Sudan?

I agree. They are not a wise people. Like to believe that the Brits would stick to the Hussein-McMahon correspondence while Lord Rothschild was farming in Downing Street, and they sat back in the ME believing that all was tickety-boo. Like Arafat at Camp David II. Like being nice when the USA insisted on voting whether international law should be followed at "181", instead of kicking and screaming.

 

This guy is hanging from cobwebs and soon will fall... here are a few facts to substantiate what I said.

Aliens Arabs from Trans-Jordan and Syria during the Mandatory British Control

We emphasize that “under the Immigration Ordinance persons habitually resident in Trans-Jordan may, unless the High Commissioner otherwise directs, enter Palestine direct from Trans-Jordan although they are not in possession of passports or other similar documents”. The Yale study also mentions this phenomenon in relation to both Jews and Arabs. The nature of the situation makes it difficult to arrive at precise and authorized figures on Arab immigration to Palestine between the two world wars. Estimates range from 60,000 to 200,000. There is general agreement, however, on one point: The chief reason for the reversal of Arab population movement was the Jewish settlement and development of the land, which altered its aspect and created sources of livelihood previously non-existent.

James Parkes elaborates this point in his book A History of Palestine from 135 AD to Modern Times (p. 320): “The Arab population continued to grow at a phenomenal rate, there was a substantial illegal immigration of Arabs especially from the Hauran (the Golan heights), and Arab prosperity increased through the increased activity of the Jewish community and the many new openings for employment which it offered.”

Luke and Keith-Roach, high-ranking officials in the Mandatory government, in the 1934 edition of their Handbook of Palestine (p. 41) describe “the continuous replenishment of Palestine and Syria from the tribes of the Arabian Desert.” And we find, in the discussions of the League of Nations Mandates Commission in 1935, reference to the report of the governor of Syria’s Hauran district that during a period of a few months of the previous year thirty thousand Hauranese had emigrated to Palestine and settled there (Permanent Mandates Commission, 27th Session, l935,p. 47). During the riots of 1936-1939 mercenaries from Syria and Lebanon were brought into the country and many stayed after the disturbances had subsided...

 

I replied in a different thread so as to keep both of them 'on-topic'.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=319794&page=4&p=1063066693#post1063066693

 

IMO its its not unreasonable to presume that while the resident inhabitant people could be decendents from a mixture of the originals / (i.e. "Canaanites ) plus conquerors/immigrants and invaders, I'm not entirely convinced that ALL late 19th Century /earlier 20th C , Ashkenazi Zionists Jews , + other who claim to be "Jews" are really descended from the biblical /mythical "Israelites " or even Judeans - wotever they wish to cal themselves. Even if one give a minority the benefit of any doubts , how the fek can they claim property ownership rights with any legal documentary title and evict /drive out non-Jews from their documented/ legitimately owned properties ?

What gives Zionist Jews the right to build settlements for Jews only and not permit the native non-Jews from building /extending their homes . ?


....

 

Well, if one is an adherent of a particular religion, then the history and holy scriptures of that religion are claimed by that adherent, regardless of that adherent's origins.


The religious argument wrt to the establishment of Israel appears to be central to anti-zionists, but in reality is no longer relevant to the Israel's existence.

Israel today exists not thru any religious piety, but thru war, blood and treasure. The exact same price that most of the nations of the world have paid for their existence.

I do agree that the neo-zionist goal of "from river to sea" is as perverse as the goal of some palestinians to "liberate all of historic palestine".

 

Nonsense. At no time have I ever expressed anything even remotely close.

I do not blindly follow anyone.
I contend that the Palestinians deserve their own nation state based on the green line, with land swaps. I also contend that while the argument can be made that a seperate Palestinian people did not exist in 48, the actions of the UN, the surrounding arab nations, the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza, AND the actions of Israel have served to create a palestinian people, forged in blood, oppression, humiliation, defiance and remarkable resiliance.

 

Excuse ,me , I think its correct to say that "Israelis " did not exist until 1948 when the Zionist entity named Israel was created.. During Ottoman empire time , + subsequent British Mandate , the inhabitants were , respectively identified as either Palestinian (Filistini) Jews/Arabs, Circassians /Armenians /Greeks etc.,etc

I was once told that Ariel Scheinerman (Sharon) birth /and identidy documents described him as a Palestinian Jew .

Before the influx of Zionist Jews - + the creation of modern Hebrew , the Arabic speaking/Arabized Jews , who was born + lived in Palestine , identified themselves. Palestinian JEWs NOT as Israelies , coz Israel did not exist pre-1948


...

 

Here they are... your words... Explain it please.

I disagree the Arabs of Palestine have had already a country and it is called Jordan and it is 77% of the Mandate for Palestine. The narrow minded Arabs would like to augment the size of their catch by another 5 to 8% and thus be on the highest plateaus in Judea and Samaria and thus be able to control Ben Gurion Airport and keep Israel hostage under the threat of Russian Strellas the shoulder held missiles than can down a civilian plane.

Reflecting similar themes, Dr. Efraim Inbar has done a study for BESA Center, "Time is on Israel's side" -- Middle East Security and Policy Studies No. 103. Its 25 pages can be viewed here:

http://besacenter.org/mideast-security-and-policy-studies/time-israels-side/

The Executive Summary of Dr. Inbar's work (emphasis added):

"Israel is a small country, and the national security of small countries is more precarious than that of large countries. Indeed, since Israel’s establishment it has dealt with existential threats from its neighbors. This study argues that – despite the need for constant political prudence – not only is Israel a big success story, time is definitely on Israel’s side. A review of the variables that influence Israel’s ability to successfully withstand protracted conflict leaves room for optimism. A survey of the military balance between Israel and her enemies, internal factors that influence national power – such as the economy, social cohesiveness, and the political system – and Israel’s standing in the international community indicate long term processes that favor Israel over its regional foes. After sixty-five years of existence, the State of Israel can be confident in its ability to overcome the challenges that stand in its path."

A powerful retort to the naysayers. And reason to direct words of gratitude Heavenward.

 

Yes in ancient time they were called Israelites.

And I was once told that the earth was flat.

we were not talking about contemporary Israel, but thanks for the irrelevant information.

 

My exact quote that I was refering to and you seem to be ignoring was :

I do agree that the neo-zionist goal of "from river to sea" is as perverse as the goal of some palestinians to "liberate all of historic palestine".

At no time did I make any statement that even approximates your interpretation:

well perhaps you would want us all in the sea then to make it less perverse to your taste...

I am well aware of the security issues of proximity.

I certainly am not arguing with Dr.Inbar's opinion. I have said as much when I say that Israel has transcended any religious rationale for existence having paid for the establishment of the modern nation of Israel with blood, sweat and treasure.

 

What was the interpretation in simple English then?

 

I was refering to what I consider radical political objectives.

Neo-zionists wish to see Eretz Israel from river to sea.
Anti-zionist Palestinians wish to see the "liberation" of all ofhistoric palestine, which as we both know is double speak for the destruction of Israel.

A simple comparision of extremist views.

 

Thank you.

 

====

Go read UNGA Res 181 and the Zionists unilateral declaration of independence



UNGA 181 was non-binding subject to negotiation for whih UN appointed envoy Count Folk Bernadotte , who was promptly murdered by Zionist Jewish terrorists , when they discovered Bernadotte report meant the Jews weren't getting as large a territory as at first proposed.

-----

 

Here is an interview with Naftali Bennett that is quite revealing at this stage.

1. 'You Can't be an Occupier in Your Own Home'

~by Gil Ronen

Economy Minister Naftali Bennett (Bayit Yehudi) reassured the public on Monday that in his opinion, the citizens of Israel will not come under any attack from Syria, and explained why he is firmly against the establishment of a "Palestinian State" in Judea and Samaria.

Speaking on the Knesset Channel, he said that Israelis could go on living their lives' normally and even noted, when asked, that his family has not renewed its supply of gas masks yet.

Asked if he was disappointed by US President Barack Obama's decision to hold off on attacking Syria until Congress debates the idea, he said that he does not want to give advice to the US President. He added, however, that "Israeli citizens have to be realistic and know that at the end of the day, 'If I am not for myself – who will be for me?' [a Talmudic adage in favor of self-reliance – ed.]. If we do not take care of our own security, no one else will. Look at how the entire world is reacting to the murder of 1,000 children with gas."

“All things told,” he said, “the world is stuttering. And on the day of truth we can only depend on ourselves. Not international guarantees, no relying on agreements – in the end, our strength, which comes from our hold upon the Land and our belief in the Land, [and] the IDF where I still serve in the reserves and am proud of it – that is what will keep us alive here.”

"We have to look at what is happening and internalize the lessons,” he explained. “In the moment of truth, the world will not be with us. The people who now want to hand over Judea and Samaria in exchange for guarantees from the world, should see what is happening. The world turns its back.”

Similar comments have been made by a number of Israeli politicians in the past few days, as the perceived dithering of the Obama administration is watched carefully by friend and foe alike, splitting Arab opinion and provoking ridicule from the Syrian regime and its allies.

Asked whom we can trust, Bennett said – “first of all, we have G-d, but also our own strength. We will not depend on the world anymore. We will not! Seventy years ago, when we hoped that the world would be there, they were not. No one was," he said, in a reference to the failure by the Allies to bomb Nazi extermination camps during the Holocaust.

"We are not occupiers"

In a wide-ranging 30-minute interview with Nehama Duek, Bennett firmly rebuffed her contention that Israel is an occupying power in Judea and Samaria.

“We are not occupiers. You cannot be an occupier in your own home. Internalize this, Nehama. We are not controlling them, they have been ruling themselves for a long time.”

“In Lebanon, in Syria, in Egypt, everything is in chaos. The only stable place is here, in our land. We have stability and quiet thanks to the IDF, from the fact that we are present in Judea and Samaria and that we live there. The same geniuses who told us that if we give Syria the Golan Heights we will have peace, are now telling us that we have to hand over Judea and Samaria. I don't accept this."

When Bennett described his proposal for applying Israeli sovereignty on parts of Judea and Samaria – Duek protested that the Palestinians want a state.

“Okay,” he said. “And I want to live. What takes precedence? My will to live? My wanting that my four children survive – or their will to have a state and an army that will annihilate me? What can I do? Even though they'd really love to annihilate me, they have no partner in this. I have this bug in my system – I love to live in my country."

During the interview, Bennett spoke about national unity, saying that part of his political mission is to unite different streams in the nation, and “to lower tensions.”

On August 22, Bennett had a similar message for the public regarding the Syria gas attack:

“Seventy years ago, when they annihilated children and babies, the world was silent,” he wrote. “The internet and television stations are not moving the world out of its complacency. Images of mass graves and piles of children cannot pass in silence.”

"A child is a child is a child,” he stated. “And don't tell me '[it's just] Arabs killing Arabs.' I will not be silent.”

 

What you say makes no sense and has no meaning...
UNGA 181 is dead and buried for a long time and to revive what the Arab refused to accept is detrimental to Israel.
The Arabs played and lost, what else can we do in a Casino when someone loses his money? NADA, ZILCH, ZERO

 

OMG - what a load of crap - International laws aren't governed by Casino rules.
However , According to your logic , perhaps the same can be said about the Holocaust, HUH ?

....

 

Now I know why I've put you on ignore all this time... You cannot have a civil discourse with anyone here...

UNGA 181 is Dead, the Arabs refused to accept it, they lost, they are losers... the Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity... and you call that crap? Very classic. Iv'e put you on <ignore> again.

 

Israelites went the same ways as other ancients - i.e. Hittites/Moabites/Jebusites/Edomites etc. Todays "jews " are not "Israelites" .


Ariel Scheinerman was born in Palestine 1928 - a Palestinian Jew there was no Israel.

 

You need to read more books on history. Someone once advised me to do that, and I did. I can now advise you based on full quality references such Cambridhe publications that the Palestinians, except for the lowland strip immediately east of the Jordan River, were never the majority people of Transjordan. THAT is why the British excised Jordan from the territory designated to be a homeland for the Jews. It is because the Israelites emerged as a people from the Canaanites. The Canaanites were not occupiers of the Jordan high plateau.

Do you continue to dispute any of that even though your quiver has run empty so many times on this topic?

 

Then why, 6 months afterwards, did the Zionists refer to it as the key approval justifying their declaration of Independence?
Was Ben-Gurion lying?

 

Explain that in simple English.... speaking of quivers your bow is broken...

What are you talking about????????? Justifying or not justifying?????????
Israel accepted UNGA 181 the Arab refused it... BTW What are you poking your nose in our declaration of Independence? The declaration of our independence is beyond what you have written here.

Maybe you should open a thread and once again be trashed as always.
Since the beginning when you appeared here on the scene until today you have contributed nothing but defamation.