Was it right to repopulate Israel with Jews?

[saxitoxin]

The official spokesman for the "Israeli Defense Forces" terror group (whose leaders previously called for gentiles to be beheaded and who famously machine-gunned US-American sailors in the water as they were pleading for their lives) has posted a photo online in blackface that he captioned "Obama Style."

http://news.yahoo.com/israeli-spokesman ... ories.html



The Israelis are laughing all the way to the bank at their one-way friendship with their U.S. colony. They utterly despise the United States and hate all Americans. With their mortgage on Congress 100% paid for they know they don't even need to pretend to be nice, just send an order for their $10 billion tithing every few months. They could gang-rape Jenna Bush on Pay-Per-View and face no repercussions.

While some early comments from outraged residents in the Israeli North American Colony, they were quickly overwhelmed by Hasbara Trolls - planted social media accounts of the IDF whose job is to overwhelm the conversation in any website when discussion of Israel arises with racist and fake tales of Palestinians, off-topic posts and insults.

[saxitoxin]

About HASBARA TROLLS -

In the immediate aftermath of the Israeli Navy’s massacre of 9 activists on the Mavi Marmara, I began a journalistic process of discrediting wild and fabricated claims by the Israeli Army Spokesman’s Unit about the incident. Around this time, when my blog began receiving unprecedented traffic, several hasbara trolls suddenly occupied my comments section. They have maintained a constant presence ever since, dragging the discussion into the gutter with propagandistic arguments and absurd personal attacks on me and other commenters — there isn’t much else to do when you are defending a country that behaves like Israel does. While I enjoy receiving legitimate criticism, I can no longer allow trolls to treat my blog like Moshe Katsav [convicted rapist Israeli president] treated his female staffers.

http://maxblumenthal.com/2011/02/portra ... ara-troll/

Max Blumenthal is an award-winning journalist and bestselling author whose articles and video documentaries have appeared in The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Daily Beast, The Nation, The Guardian, The Independent Film Channel, The Huffington Post, Salon.com, Al Jazeera English and many other publications. He is a writing fellow for the Nation Institute.

[saxitoxin]

Bestselling author Max Blumenthal's video "Feeling the Hate in Jerusalem" -- he interviews Israeli citizens who say, if the U.S. stops sending them money it can go "f*ck itself" and then cry "white power!" and "f*ck the n***ers!" Other typical Israelis declare that "Christians are Nazis."

Other Israelis don't know the name of their own Prime Minister but declare "Obama is a Muslim" and declare he should be assassinated (see: JFK).

[Dukasaur]

That's Saxi's last post in this thread, gang - let's print this bitch and get it shipped to the studio - SAYONARA!

[saxitoxin]

Dr. Philip Giraldi, decorated U.S. Army infantry officer, former U.S. clandestine officer for the CIA, fluent in 5 languages and with a Ph.D. in History from the University of London, foreign policy advisor to Ron Paul and national security correspondent for American Conservative Magazine, writes ...

WHY I HATE ISRAEL

Even those pundits who seem to want to distance U.S. foreign policy from Tel Aviv’s demands and begin treating Israel like any other country sometimes feel compelled to make excuses and apologies before getting down to the nitty-gritty. The self-lacerating prologues generally describe how much the writer really has a lot of Jewish friends and how he or she thinks Israelis are great people and that Israel is a wonderful country before launching into what is usually a fairly mild critique.

Well, I don’t feel that way. I don’t like Israel very much. Whether or not I have Jewish friends does not define how I see Israel and is irrelevant to the argument.
But even the existence of good upstanding Israelis doesn’t alter the fact that the governments that they have elected are essentially part of a long-running criminal enterprise ...

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/201 ... ke-israel/

[stahrgazer]

they did indeed poach land that did not legally belong to them. But as was also correctly pointed out in this thread, that ignores thousands of years of history were the Jewish people were subjugated and forced out of this land, which historically (if you go back long enough) was theirs to begin with.

So we could argue that the Palestinians - or their predecessors - had illegally burned the deeds that the Israelis had originally to prove the land was theirs; so the Palestinians themselves had poached land that did not legally belong to them and made up new, false, "deeds" to "prove" their claim to the lands they had poached.

[saxitoxin]

they did indeed poach land that did not legally belong to them. But as was also correctly pointed out in this thread, that ignores thousands of years of history were the Jewish people were subjugated and forced out of this land, which historically (if you go back long enough) was theirs to begin with.

So we could argue that the Palestinians - or their predecessors - had illegally burned the deeds that the Israelis had originally to prove the land was theirs; so the Palestinians themselves had poached land that did not legally belong to them and made up new, false, "deeds" to "prove" their claim to the lands they had poached.

Sorry, but you don't have any clue what you're talking about.

Anyway, back to the topic ...

[saxitoxin]

France to Recognize Palestinian State!

France announced Tuesday that it plans to vote in favor of recognizing a Palestinian state at the U.N. General Assembly this week. Unlike the Security Council, there are no vetoes in the General Assembly and the resolution is virtually certain of approval. But such a vote by France - a permanent council member - could weigh on decisions in other European capitals. Europe is divided over the issue. Switzerland will likely vote "yes" and Germany is expected to vote "no." The resolution would endorse a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem, the territories captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war. Israel opposes a pullback to the 1967 lines.

http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworl ... nians.html

Bravo to France. This is just the start. Taking back the 1967 lines are the tip of the iceberg. Palestine will not be free until it owns everything from River to Sea.

The noose is tightening, though.

[stahrgazer]

Sorry, but you don't have any clue what you're talking about.

I think you were looking in your mirror when you said that.

We're talking about land that has been fought over for centuries. Stating that the just-prior inhabitants are the ones who had the legal deeds to the land fails to recognize the people who'd been on the land before the just-prior inhabitants took "ownership."

Again, this is land that has been fought over and conquered for centuries and no one wants to yield to the other party.

Would going back to 1967 borders end these wars? I doubt it. But it would put Israel in more danger of losing all their land in the region, so I can understand why they don't wish to do that... especially since I doubt the others in the region would stop at those borders.

[GreecePwns]

What happened thousands of years ago is of minimal impact to the individual lives of Jews today.

Quite the opposite. What happened in the past is of central importance, because if the Jewish people had never been forcibly ejected from their homeland, by many of the same religious and ethnic groups that were in the area in 1947, they would not be in the situation they are in today.

Of course, but in a court of law what happened thousands of years ago cannot be laid on Palestinians today. You understand the difference don't you?

The international community got together and agreed (by a 72%-28% margin) that Israel had rights to at least part of the land in Palestine in 1947. The Palestinians refused to recognize the legitimacy of the UN's plan at the time. The PLO has since used this point to argue in the past that they have sovereignty recognized by international law. That may also mean that Israel does too, which necessarily means that it cannot be required to compensate the Palestinians that rightfully belongs to them by international law. Compensation may very well be required to solve the issue in a practical manner, but I don't think the international law here is as clearly on the side of the Palestinians as you and saxi are making it out to be.

The UN Partition Plan is not an international law.

[Metsfanmax]

What happened thousands of years ago is of minimal impact to the individual lives of Jews today.

Quite the opposite. What happened in the past is of central importance, because if the Jewish people had never been forcibly ejected from their homeland, by many of the same religious and ethnic groups that were in the area in 1947, they would not be in the situation they are in today.

Of course, but in a court of law what happened thousands of years ago cannot be laid on Palestinians today. You understand the difference don't you?

Yes, which is exactly why appealing to a court of law to solve this problem is absurd. It looks at one narrow action that is part of a much larger story. Additionally, a lasting solution will only happen by peaceful consent of both the Palestinians and Israelis. A court-ordered financial or territorial compensation won't magically end the conflict.

The international community got together and agreed (by a 72%-28% margin) that Israel had rights to at least part of the land in Palestine in 1947. The Palestinians refused to recognize the legitimacy of the UN's plan at the time. The PLO has since used this point to argue in the past that they have sovereignty recognized by international law. That may also mean that Israel does too, which necessarily means that it cannot be required to compensate the Palestinians that rightfully belongs to them by international law. Compensation may very well be required to solve the issue in a practical manner, but I don't think the international law here is as clearly on the side of the Palestinians as you and saxi are making it out to be.

The UN Partition Plan is not an international law.

That does not mean it is irrelevant if this issue came to be judged in a court of international law.

[GreecePwns]

It is irrelevant. Why should Palestinians have to suffer for something that happened thousands of years ago, something they individually did not commit even remotely? Why should Jews benefit from something that happened thousands of years ago, something they individually did not have to experience even remotely? No issue has ever operated in this fashion. Why treat this one special?

On the other hand, the Jews of 1948 until now are directly benefiting individually from their violations of international law and the Palestinians are directly hurting individually from these violations. That's really all that matters when discussing this issue, legally, ethically what have you. The only exception to this is religious prophecy, which has no standing in legal or ethical matters.

In fact, the issue is irrelevant in the court of law.

[Metsfanmax]

It is irrelevant. Why should Palestinians have to suffer for something that happened thousands of years ago, something they individually did not commit even remotely? Why should Jews benefit from something that happened thousands of years ago, something they individually did not have to experience even remotely? No issue has ever operated in this fashion. Why treat this one special?

On the other hand, the Jews of 1948 until now are directly benefiting individually from their violations of international law and the Palestinians are directly hurting individually from these violations. That's really all that matters when discussing this issue, legally, ethically what have you. The only exception to this is religious prophecy, which has no standing in legal or ethical matters.

In fact, the issue is irrelevant in the court of law.

Looking at it this way is facile. After all, the majority of Israelis alive now were not alive in 1948. Should they be ejected from their homeland, where they have always lived, because of something their grandfathers did?

[DoomYoshi]

Um. It seems people think that Israel is actually the Jews homeland. I hate to break it to you, but you can refer to the part of the bible where they go on a major trip TO Israel. Also, the anthropological evidence proves that they were invaders to Israel, even if you go back far enough.

Also, I repeat, the Jews aren't a real race.

[saxitoxin]

Sorry, but you don't have any clue what you're talking about.

I think you were looking in your mirror when you said that.

We're talking about land that has been fought over for centuries. Stating that the just-prior inhabitants are the ones who had the legal deeds to the land fails to recognize the people who'd been on the land before the just-prior inhabitants took "ownership."

Again, this is land that has been fought over and conquered for centuries and no one wants to yield to the other party.

Would going back to 1967 borders end these wars? I doubt it. But it would put Israel in more danger of losing all their land in the region, so I can understand why they don't wish to do that... especially since I doubt the others in the region would stop at those borders.

There is no such thing as "Jews." Property is inherited by individuals, not poorly defined groups of people with roughly similar beliefs in the existence of the same Egyptian God of Thunder or related nonsense.

[saxitoxin]

It is irrelevant. Why should Palestinians have to suffer for something that happened thousands of years ago, something they individually did not commit even remotely? Why should Jews benefit from something that happened thousands of years ago, something they individually did not have to experience even remotely? No issue has ever operated in this fashion. Why treat this one special?

On the other hand, the Jews of 1948 until now are directly benefiting individually from their violations of international law and the Palestinians are directly hurting individually from these violations. That's really all that matters when discussing this issue, legally, ethically what have you. The only exception to this is religious prophecy, which has no standing in legal or ethical matters.

In fact, the issue is irrelevant in the court of law.

Looking at it this way is facile. After all, the majority of Israelis alive now were not alive in 1948. Should they be ejected from their homeland, where they have always lived, because of something their grandfathers did?

Yes.

"Homeland" is a TV drama on Showtime and a rule in Capture the Flag. It is not a real thing.

But if individual people want to stay, and those people happen to be Jewish or Scientologist or members of AAA, or whatever, and they're not living in a house that someone else actually owns, sure, feel free.

[2dimes]

If there was no such thing as "homeland" why does Obamer need to devote so many resources to protect it?

[Metsfanmax]

Yes.

"Homeland" is a TV drama on Showtime and a rule in Capture the Flag. It is not a real thing.

But if individual people want to stay, and those people happen to be Jewish or Scientologist or members of AAA, or whatever, and they're not living in a house that someone else actually owns, sure, feel free.

Nation-states are not real things either. International law is not a real thing either. They are human-constructed artifices. With this logic, why should anyone care that the sovereignty of the nation-state that was Palestine was violated by the nation-state that is now Israel?

[saxitoxin]

Yes.

"Homeland" is a TV drama on Showtime and a rule in Capture the Flag. It is not a real thing.

But if individual people want to stay, and those people happen to be Jewish or Scientologist or members of AAA, or whatever, and they're not living in a house that someone else actually owns, sure, feel free.

Nation-states are not real things either. International law is not a real thing either. They are human-constructed artifices. With this logic, why should anyone care that the sovereignty of the nation-state that was Palestine was violated by the nation-state that is now Israel?

That's a valid question, but you're making an argument I didn't.

The "right to homeland" is not a right enumerated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (or any other convention of which I'm aware). The UDHR does, however, guarantee ...

Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

Individual Palestinians had their houses arbitrarily seized on the basis of their skin color and last names and people from Ukraine moved into them. The party responsible for arbitrarily depriving them of their property must pay full compensation to them or their legal heirs, including accumulated interest for loss-of-use.

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

If a 19 year-old from Ukraine claims to believe in the Egyptian God of Thunder he can immigrate to Israel without restriction. This is an opportunity given to no one else, even people (not "people" in the abstract sense of the word, but actual living individuals now in their 70s and 80s), whose physical houses are currently in Israel being lived in by Ukrainian drug dealers to whom they didn't sell.

[Metsfanmax]

Yes.

"Homeland" is a TV drama on Showtime and a rule in Capture the Flag. It is not a real thing.

But if individual people want to stay, and those people happen to be Jewish or Scientologist or members of AAA, or whatever, and they're not living in a house that someone else actually owns, sure, feel free.

Nation-states are not real things either. International law is not a real thing either. They are human-constructed artifices. With this logic, why should anyone care that the sovereignty of the nation-state that was Palestine was violated by the nation-state that is now Israel?

That's a valid question, but you're making an argument I didn't.

The "right to homeland" is not a right enumerated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (or any other convention of which I'm aware). The UDHR does, however, guarantee ...

Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

Individual Palestinians had their houses arbitrarily seized on the basis of their skin color and last names and people from Ukraine moved into them. The party responsible for arbitrarily depriving them of their property must pay full compensation to them or their legal heirs, including accumulated interest for loss-of-use.

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

If a 19 year-old from Ukraine claims to believe in the Egyptian God of Thunder he can immigrate to Israel without restriction. This is an opportunity given to no one else, even people (not "people" in the abstract sense of the word, but actual living individuals now in their 70s and 80s), whose physical houses are currently in Israel being lived in by Ukrainian drug dealers to whom they didn't sell.

So would you be satisfied if Israel opened its doors and let Palestinians become citizens or legal residents of Israel? I know that this is an unlikely scenario.

[saxitoxin]

Yes.

"Homeland" is a TV drama on Showtime and a rule in Capture the Flag. It is not a real thing.

But if individual people want to stay, and those people happen to be Jewish or Scientologist or members of AAA, or whatever, and they're not living in a house that someone else actually owns, sure, feel free.

Nation-states are not real things either. International law is not a real thing either. They are human-constructed artifices. With this logic, why should anyone care that the sovereignty of the nation-state that was Palestine was violated by the nation-state that is now Israel?

That's a valid question, but you're making an argument I didn't.

The "right to homeland" is not a right enumerated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (or any other convention of which I'm aware). The UDHR does, however, guarantee ...

Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

Individual Palestinians had their houses arbitrarily seized on the basis of their skin color and last names and people from Ukraine moved into them. The party responsible for arbitrarily depriving them of their property must pay full compensation to them or their legal heirs, including accumulated interest for loss-of-use.

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

If a 19 year-old from Ukraine claims to believe in the Egyptian God of Thunder he can immigrate to Israel without restriction. This is an opportunity given to no one else, even people (not "people" in the abstract sense of the word, but actual living individuals now in their 70s and 80s), whose physical houses are currently in Israel being lived in by Ukrainian drug dealers to whom they didn't sell.

So would you be satisfied if Israel opened its doors and let Palestinians become citizens or legal residents of Israel? I know that this is an unlikely scenario.

As citizens, yes. If that happened, Palestinians would be the majority and have a voting control of parliament. All the absentee property laws could be repealed overnight and then the current occupants of those homes moved out by the new Palestinian-commanded Israeli police in favor of their legal owners. (There would still be the question of 60 years of back rent the evicted occupants would owe but that could be resolved with the aid of collections agencies like Experian and EquiFax. You'd probably have to start by freezing personal bank accounts and expropriating whatever funds you could find in them.)

It's a different route to the same goal but probably better because it doesn't have the side effect of punishing the many Jews who actually do have legal property claims in Israel that must be respected (generally those dating from pre-1948). Only those people who are physically inhabiting stolen properties would have to reimburse their victims for thefts.

[Metsfanmax]

saxi, since you were born in 1937 in Germany, the Nazi era must have had some sort of effect on your youth. Would you say that has affected your perception of Judaism and/or its practitioners, and if so, how?

[saxitoxin]

Even the fairy tale justifications are unsupported by the storytellers. In this clip the Zionist Rabbi Daniel Lapin tells conservative Christian pastor John Haggee that the Arabs are the people to whom the Judeo-Egyptian Thunder God "Yahweh" listens -



It's important the phony religious justifications for Israel be dispensed. Once we realize there is no biblical religious conflict - even in the Jewish religion - that those arguments are disinformation and deception and this is a conflict of land thieves versus property owners, the legitimate next steps in the liberation struggle become clear and non-disputable.

[GabonX]

So would you be satisfied if Israel opened its doors and let Palestinians become citizens or legal residents of Israel? I know that this is an unlikely scenario.

As citizens, yes. If that happened, Palestinians would be the majority and have a voting control of parliament. All the absentee property laws could be repealed overnight and then the current occupants of those homes moved out by the new Palestinian-commanded Israeli police in favor of their legal owners. (There would still be the question of 60 years of back rent the evicted occupants would owe but that could be resolved with the aid of collections agencies like Experian and EquiFax. You'd probably have to start by freezing personal bank accounts and expropriating whatever funds you could find in them.)

It's a different route to the same goal but probably better because it doesn't have the side effect of punishing the many Jews who actually do have legal property claims in Israel that must be respected (generally those dating from pre-1948). Only those people who are physically inhabiting stolen properties would have to reimburse their victims for thefts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2sstzXukRQ#t=4m40s

[saxitoxin]

UN RECOGNIZES STATE OF PALESTINE BY HISTORIC MAJORITY

The General Assembly just voted 138-9 to recognize the State of Palestine, over the howls of the Israeli ambassador. This was followed by a standing ovation on the assembly floor, cheering and the unfurling of the Palestinian national flag.

Every nation in the world that voted, voted to recognize the sovereign and independent State of Palestine except Israel, the U.S. and 7 tiny countries most of the world has never even heard of:
- Ceska
- Nauru (population: 9,378)
- Marshal Islands (former U.S. colony)
- Micronesia (former U.S. colony)
- Panama (former U.S. colony)
- Palau (former U.S. colony)
- Canada (current U.S. colony)