• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Israeli state terrorism

Where should the Jews go? Anyplace that isn't going to get them killed would be a good choice.

Can you be a bit more specific?

You mentioned "an island somewhere". Care to name it?

Also, if the jews will go anywhere else, wouldn't the native be justified, in your view--for exactly the same reasons as the Palestinians are, in your view--of fighting the "foreign invaders"?

Isn't, then, the "resistance" and "attempt to get jews killed" due simply to the presence of the jews, according to your view, so anywhere they will go will get them killed?

(And, of course, it will all be their fault... for existing.)
 
It isn't relevant at all. They are the ones who try to use some ancient ancestoral claim as a rationale for their living in and defending a desert with their lives.

The Palestinans had their lands stolen in their lifetimes. That I would consider a valid claim on the land. Not centuries old ones tho.

Of course it would be great if everybody would just get along, but that is idealistic. Religion isn't something you can easily break people from or convince them they are wrong about.
 
Skeptic said:
Where should the Jews go? Anyplace that isn't going to get them killed would be a good choice.

Can you be a bit more specific?

You mentioned "an island somewhere". Care to name it?

Also, if the jews will go anywhere else, wouldn't the native be justified, in your view--for exactly the same reasons as the Palestinians are, in your view--of fighting the "foreign invaders"?

Isn't, then, the "resistance" and "attempt to get jews killed" due simply to the presence of the jews, according to your view, so anywhere they will go will get them killed?

(And, of course, it will all be their fault... for existing.)
Click to expand...

You could buy a place instead of stealing it you know. I am sure there were people living on Taiwan before all the mainland chinese went there but you don't hear about them fighting over it.
 
Vagabond said:
You could buy a place instead of stealing it you know. I am sure there were people living on Taiwan before all the mainland chinese went there but you don't hear about them fighting over it.
Click to expand...

Suppose Jews were to buy land in Palestine?
 
Vagabond said:
You could buy a place instead of stealing it you know.
Click to expand...

Won't work. As you damn well know, ALL the land that belond to jews until the 1948 war was bought, fair and square, by jews from Arabs. But that didn't matter. The Arabs declared that jews buying land is in itself an intolerable crime, simply because the buyer was jewish. So they started their war of annihilation. Incidentally, this is still a crime--a capital one in fact--in the PA and in Jordan to sell land to a jew. All the land israel has had been acquired in one of two ways: buying it outright, or getting it when defending against genocidal wars of annihilation. There isn't any more justified way to get land. Yet that doesn't matter to you and your ilk. The jews "stole" the land simply because they are jews.

So if the jews buy land--anywhere--and move there, the sole result would be the same: the natives declaring jews buying land is intolerable invasions and colonialism (or whatever) and trying to get the jews killed anyway. And you will support them, since in your view, if a jew lives somewhere where he is hated, it's his fault--why did he go there, anyway? is he stupid or somethin'?--so he simply must move on, even if he bought the land in the first place. After all, you support the war of annihilation against israel despite the fact that the jews did buy the land, so you would surely support the same war anywhere else.

Just like, you know, you believe that blacks must not live where white people don't want them, or Muslims where christians don't want them... right?... if they had "a brain in their head", surely they would move somewhere they're wanted... oh wait. THAT is racism. All other races and creeds have the right to live in peace; only when jews are attacked it is the jews' fault and the jews' responsibility to move away if that happens.

(But you're not an antisemite, nosireee Bob...)

So, it doesn't matter, Vagabond. It's not stealing land that's the problem, it's having land at all that gets the Jihad's panties in a knot, no matter how it was aquired. We jews might as well steal it outright and save the money, for all the difference it makes.
 
Vagabond said:
I just watched a documentary on the Six day war a a little while ago. They specifically said that the Israelis not only fired the first shot but spent the previous two years spying and making plans based on the fact they would make a pre-emptive attack and hit the Egyptian airforce on the ground. Here's an actual logical question for you. If the Egyptians fired first what were all their planes doing on the ground? Why were all pilots and army asleep at the time? Many of the Egyptians died from lack of water walking back across the Sinai. If their intention was to invade. Why wouldn't they have had water stockpiles at the border? The only people who don't think the Israelis started this war are delusional Israelis. The UN knew they did too, thus why they kept telling them to stop.
Click to expand...
Skeptic wasn't talking about the Six Day war. He was talking about the war in 1948. You DO know there was a war in 1948, don't you?
 
kimiko said:
Manhattan. :D
Click to expand...

Good one, Kimiko, but Manhattan was already bought and paid for ($24 worth of beads and trinkets, remember?).

And speaking of beads and trinkets - I wonder how many Jews would support a Native American uprising that would claim Manhattan (or Catalina Island, or any other American island besides Alcatraz) as a sovereign Native American state.

Can you even imagine the repercussions if all the Native tribes gathered and proclaimed an Israel-sized portion of the U.S. as their country and began fencing it off and militarily defending their borders? I know this is an oversimplification of the Holy Land's history, but the parallels can't be denied.

Certainly the Jewish people have a right to survive with their culture and religion intact as they see fit, but simply plopping yourself down on a plot of land (and paying no heed to the currently indigenous population) and declaring it yours because it USED to be your ancestor's land centuries ago will definitely anger or even wipe out the indigenous population. I know, it happened to the Lakota, the Apache, the Cheyenne, the Cherokee and too many others to name.

I once suggested that the Palestinian and Israeli cultures need to inter-mesh more in order to make their civilian targets less attractive. I believe it would also help Palestinian and Israeli children realize that they are more alike in all the ways that count and that wars and violence are often the result of the inadequacies of politicians and religious leaders.
 
Last edited:
Can you even imagine the repercussions if all the Native tribes gathered and proclaimed an Israel-sized portion of the U.S. as their country
Click to expand...

In point of fact, the native tribes around the USA already have 'nations' (protected lands) which are greater than the size of Israel.

Just in the State of Michigan, the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi native tribe has been awarded a 675-acre site in Berrien County's New Buffalo Township, near Lake Michigan and the Indiana border.
http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/mich...31/113856986368450.xml&storylist=newsmichigan
 
Mephisto said:
Can you even imagine the repercussions if all the Native tribes gathered and proclaimed an Israel-sized portion of the U.S. as their country and began fencing it off and militarily defending their borders? I know this is an oversimplification of the Holy Land's history, but the parallels can't be denied.
Click to expand...

That's actually not such a bad analogy, except those Zionists didn't just plop themselves down and claim a bunch of land. They purchased it legally. It was a movement, one guy wrote a couple of books, some other guys organized things, the word spread around, some people hated it, others loved it.

So imagine a movement within the Native American populations to solve a problem of continually being second class citizens by just encouraging Native Americans to move to one state and buy land there with the ultimate goal of creating a society that was predominantly Native American. Suppose there was a charismatic Native American leader who proposed the idea in a book that became a best seller, and some Native American businessmen donated some money to start a foundation that would facilitate land purchases to get the ball rolling, and Native American intellectuals started proposing ideas for creating improved societies by incorporating Native American values and traditions.

Would that be such a terrible thing?

I don’t think so. I can imagine some people being upset about it, but I can’t see whole communities rising up in genocidal rage to stop it.

Mephisto said:
Certainly the Jewish people have a right to survive with their culture and religion intact as they see fit, but simply plopping yourself down on a plot of land (and paying no heed to the currently indigenous population) and declaring it yours because it USED to be your ancestor's land centuries ago will definitely anger or even wipe out the indigenous population. I know, it happened to the Lakota, the Apache, the Cheyenne, the Cherokee and too many others to name.
Click to expand...

I honestly think the parallel fits better to compare the Native Americans to the Jews in Diaspora than to the Arabs. Manifest Destiny wasn’t white people coming to seek refuge in the land of their ancestors, it was white people seeking wealth through conquest by taking it away from people who, in their appreciation, didn’t know how to exploit it properly and certainly didn’t have the ability to stop them.

Mephisto said:
I once suggested that the Palestinian and Israeli cultures need to inter-mesh more in order to make their civilian targets less attractive. I believe it would also help Palestinian and Israeli children realize that they are more alike in all the ways that count and that wars and violence are often the result of the inadequacies of politicians and religious leaders.
Click to expand...

If you actually talk to people from the region, that happens. It’s the intifada that put a stop to it.
 
Mephisto said:
And speaking of beads and trinkets - I wonder how many Jews would support a Native American uprising that would claim Manhattan (or Catalina Island, or any other American island besides Alcatraz) as a sovereign Native American state.
Click to expand...
Stop making me laugh. :D Actually, I've been doing a little research since I read this blog post: http://www.juancole.com/2006/01/abramoff-and-al-arian-lobbyists.html I think there may be a general trend of anti-Indian sentiment among Zionists.
Can you even imagine the repercussions if all the Native tribes gathered and proclaimed an Israel-sized portion of the U.S. as their country and began fencing it off and militarily defending their borders? I know this is an oversimplification of the Holy Land's history, but the parallels can't be denied.
Click to expand...
It would be crushed immediately.
Certainly the Jewish people have a right to survive with their culture and religion intact as they see fit, but simply plopping yourself down on a plot of land (and paying no heed to the currently indigenous population) and declaring it yours because it USED to be your ancestor's land centuries ago will definitely anger or even wipe out the indigenous population. I know, it happened to the Lakota, the Apache, the Cheyenne, the Cherokee and too many others to name.
Click to expand...
Some of the land was bought, and there were plans among the Zionists to ethnically cleanse what was subsequently expected to be given to them by the international community. This quote from Stephen Bonsal's book Suitors and Supplicants shows the sheer glee of Ben Israel at the prospect of an ethnically cleansed Jerusalem:
(it was his word of greeting as well as his parting salutation), "Next year in Jerusalem we shall meet. Oh, happy, happy day when the dog-brothers no longer shall swagger about the Holy Places!"
Click to expand...
-1919

Indians understand both sides. But considering how many Jews live outside Israel, including every Israeli forum member except one, where there are no active rebellions by the former inhabitants- this violence is all unnecessary. If America was so unsafe, you'd think no one would live here.
 
Last edited:
webfusion said:
In point of fact, the native tribes around the USA already have 'nations' (protected lands) which are greater than the size of Israel.

Just in the State of Michigan, the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi native tribe has been awarded a 675-acre site in Berrien County's New Buffalo Township, near Lake Michigan and the Indiana border.
http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/news-31/113856986368450.xml&storylist=newsmichigan
Click to expand...
A- Indians have always had nations. "Nation" does not refer solely to land base- it means an entire system of governance and law.

B- You seem to not understand what "land trusts" are. They are pieces of land that the federal government recognizes as belonging to individual nations. There are over 500 separate native nations within the US. They are not connected to each other. The nation buys land and the US government puts it in "trust"- they never pay taxes on it and are allowed to conduct themselves as the nation they have always been within it, to whatever degree the federal government deigns to allow them. To not allow these would be to continue and/or complete the process of conquest. And other people never ever lose their land and have it awarded to Indian nations. It already belongs to the nation, is purchased by them sometimes with settlement money from lawsuits paid out by the government, or is federal land handed over. Let me repeat- NO ONE EVER LOSES LAND TO INDIANS. It would be disgusting for Indians to repeat one of the crimes that has been so devastating to their societies.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
That's actually not such a bad analogy, except those Zionists didn't just plop themselves down and claim a bunch of land. They purchased it legally. It was a movement, one guy wrote a couple of books, some other guys organized things, the word spread around, some people hated it, others loved it.
Click to expand...
There were multiple guys who wrote books, although you only seem to have read Altneuland. Of course, Herzl's private writings betrayed his true feelings about "transfer" of the indigenous population- Capeldodger posted at least one quote from Herzl's diary on the forum already. There are numerous references to expulsion/transfer/removal/ethnic cleansing by Zionists over a long period of time. Considering Jewish ownership of somewhere between 8 and 14%(various sources) of the land at the time of the UN partition, to extend the analogy to Indians- had Indians bought a fraction of land while numerous major figures of the movement had expressed plans to drive out the rest of the inhabitants, one can imagine how violently the rest of the population living in the area of the proposed Indian state would react.
So imagine a movement within the Native American populations to solve a problem of continually being second class citizens by just encouraging Native Americans to move to one state and buy land there with the ultimate goal of creating a society that was predominantly Native American. Suppose there was a charismatic Native American leader who proposed the idea in a book that became a best seller, and some Native American businessmen donated some money to start a foundation that would facilitate land purchases to get the ball rolling, and Native American intellectuals started proposing ideas for creating improved societies by incorporating Native American values and traditions.

Would that be such a terrible thing?
Click to expand...
It'll never happen, for a multitude of reasons, not the least of which that hundreds of nations were robbed of land all across the continent, and the vast majority of them would still be abandoning their ancestral lands to concentrate enough Indians in one state to make a pan-Indian society.

And when there are Americans who are so insensitive as to compare their grandparents defaulting on their mortgage or taxes to ethnic cleansing- being driven by bayonet from their homes into stockades as a mob torches the crops and house, given rotting meat and moldy bread as their only rations, loaded like cattle into wagons, marched chest high through swamps during the dead of winter without adequate clothing, deliberately taken on routes near places with active outbreaks of pandemic diseases like cholera-well, let's say the goodness of the average American isn't something that can be counted on.
I don’t think so. I can imagine some people being upset about it, but I can’t see whole communities rising up in genocidal rage to stop it.
Click to expand...
Seeing as regular Americans were responsible for slaughtering Indians nearly to extinction, you seem very confident about the safety of them. They had their severed heads kicked down city streets, organs cut out and displayed in public places, bits of bodies turned in for reward payments from various government entities, photos of soldiers taken next to piles of dead Indian bodies, women surreptitiously sterilized by goverment employed doctors, etc etc etc.
I honestly think the parallel fits better to compare the Native Americans to the Jews in Diaspora than to the Arabs. Manifest Destiny wasn’t white people coming to seek refuge in the land of their ancestors, it was white people seeking wealth through conquest by taking it away from people who, in their appreciation, didn’t know how to exploit it properly and certainly didn’t have the ability to stop them.
Click to expand...
There were many reasons whites did what they did, and it wasn't all monetary greed. The founders seemed to mostly want their own country.
 
kimiko -- "Let me repeat- NO ONE EVER LOSES LAND TO INDIANS."


Nope, we just lose $$$$$$$ ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom