+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 152122232425
Results 241 to 243 of 243

Thread: Debate: Israel – victim or aggressor?

  1. Default Not tiresome; just historical fact

    Quote Originally Posted by RevAnarchist View Post
    Seriously, I would go all the way back to biblical times because Israel is a unique state and nation. There are so many reasons that Israel has a right to her tiny nation, I will list a few of them. The first reason is that Israel has the right to the land. The archeological evidence supports it. Israelis presence in Israel for thousands of years is proven, no serious archeologist would deny that. There are coins, pottery shards the cities, the culture. Israel’s claim to the land predates any claims that other peoples in the regions may have. The ancient Philistines are extinct as well as others that may of had valid claim by lineage, except for guess who, the Israelis.
    The evidence which you provide here for the Jews’ ‘a priori’ right to Israel is flawed because it dates back way before the time when the Jews were only a tiny minority in Palestine; a situation which lasted for many hundreds if not thousands of years. There were others who remained in Palestine during this period as a clear majority. Surely THEY have the overwhelming right from deep-history?

    But your position is flawed for an even more fundamental reason. Do your nephew’s books tell you what happened to the indigenous peoples of the land of Canaan, who were there when Abram was supposed to have drifted by? Apparently not, because you imply that they "became extinct". Do they tell you what modern archaeologists believe; those who are not swayed by old legends written hundreds of years after the fact? Let me explain.

    Modern scientific consensus is that many of the legends quoted in the Bible are not historically accurate. The Israelites formed as a religious sect (believing in monotheism) within the same peoples who had ancestrally occupied these lands for millennia. This explains the DNA results which make Mizrahi Jews all but indistinguishable from Palestinians based on their Haplogroup J1 (defined by the 267 marker). The differences displayed by Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews are adequately explained by later intermixing with European lineages. The conclusion is that the Israelites were just as indigenous to Palestine as the other inhabitants of the area.

    What happened then? It is believed that many pagans were converted to this new monotheistic sect – they became Jews. Then, with the onset of Christianity and persecution of the Jews by the Romans, many (but obviously not all) Jews converted to Christianity. In the 8th century a new conversion occurred, this time to Islam. But these conversions to-and-fro all largely involved the ancestors of the original inhabitants of Canaan; peoples whose DNA was essentially the same over millennia. They were all always from the same ancestral root stock, some being swayed by new faiths and others not. It is a simple uncomplicated explanation that does not need to fight the genetic evidence.

    Therefore, any argument that you make for the Jews having a deep historical right to Israel/Palestine, applies equally to the Palestinians, with one exception. The Jews left. The Palestinians remained where they had always been, guarding the herds of sheep and goats and tending the olive and almond trees of Palestine. Do your nephews books reflect this modern view?
    Last edited by klipkap; Mar 12 2012 at 05:15 AM.
    I deal in facts. If anyone finds 'facts' to be anti-Semetic; Jew hating, neo-Nazi; Islamo-fascist, etc, I disclaim any responsibility for their delusions

  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RevAnarchist View Post
    Flashback to WW1, Mr Allenby captured Jerusalem without firing a single shot. He was British. How does that tie into this mess of a story? The British now had the land we call Israel it was not long before another happy thing happened. A man named Weitzman, a Jewish chemist, discovered a way to make Nitro from materials that existed in England which saved the British because they had no way to make the explosive that was vital to the war effort. Still lost? Ok here is the clincher. The British were so grateful for the Jewish chemists contribution that they said they were going to give the Jewish people a homeland! That is in every text book printed. The brits also gained something else, money from the rich banker Jews to help finance the war, ie WW1.
    Thank you for confirming the British gain. It goes a long way to explaining why they make a clear promise to Hussein in 1915 to get the Arabs to respond to T.E. Lawrence (L of Arabia) when he exhorted them to rise up against the Ottoman empire. Then, not even 3 years later, after the Arabs had complied with their side of the bargain, the Brits make a promise to Rothschild (as representative of the Zionists) which clearly contradicts the Hussein promise.

    Yes, your logic and historical recount is impeccable.

    And it goes to show how the local ‘wogs’ or ‘fellahs’ were screwed in the cause of British interests. Thank you for confirming the reason for the deceit which Zionist apologists try to deny even exists.

    So the 'fellahs' get screwed once again. After centuries, no - after millennia of occupation, when the hour of their independence seemed within their reach, a new colonialist occupier took the place of the dozens who went before. And the Zionists offer the fact that there never was a Palestine country as a reason why there should not be one now. How sick to perpetrate this suppression for yet more generations.
    Last edited by klipkap; Mar 12 2012 at 05:57 AM.
    I deal in facts. If anyone finds 'facts' to be anti-Semetic; Jew hating, neo-Nazi; Islamo-fascist, etc, I disclaim any responsibility for their delusions

  3. Default Correct!! - “(*)(*)(*)(*) this is getting tiresome!”

    Quote Originally Posted by RevAnarchist View Post
    BTW, the homeland that Britain said it would set aside for the nation of Israel constituted was the nation of Jordan--the whole thing. That was what Britain promised to give the Jews in 1917. Now do you see why Israel has the land legally?
    (*)(*)(*)(*) this is getting tiresome!
    MYTH ALERT!!! MYTH ALERT!!! MYTH ALERT!!!

    Britain NEVER undertook to set aside ANY land for the nation of Israel. After sticking to real historical facts and even emphasising buried ones, I am disappointed that you had to resort to a twisting of the truth. The documented Mandate for Palestine never even mentions the word ‘nation’, only homeland. It makes it abundantly clear that this homeland would be in territory that would be shared and in which the Jews also had the right to nationality. This means that only a single country was ever intended, and it was never exclusively Jewish.

    Once we internalise that document, ‘safeguarded’ under international law, look to see that it is consistent with the Balfour declaration in which the civil rights of the existing inhabitants were to be guaranteed, and we then look at what we have today, how can we possibly conclude other than that land was taken from the Palestinians and given to the Jews.

    Yet at every turn the Zionist apologists attempt to smudge this clear fact over by the incessant repetition of their Myths.

    You are absolutely correct, RA, “(*)(*)(*)(*) this is getting tiresome!”
    Last edited by klipkap; Mar 12 2012 at 06:08 AM.
    I deal in facts. If anyone finds 'facts' to be anti-Semetic; Jew hating, neo-Nazi; Islamo-fascist, etc, I disclaim any responsibility for their delusions

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 25 of 25 FirstFirst ... 152122232425

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks