|
|
Post by Soomaal on May 23, 2005 22:23:59 GMT -5
Man, Subliminal has summed up the whole situation in a few short sentences. I totally agree. Palestinians are the only Arabs that have any balls left, they are the last of the real Arabs. Whats funny is if an Arab were to say such things, it would be called terrorism.  Imagine if we could claim the land of our ancestors, I would be a wealthy mofo. |
|
|
|
Post by Wadaad on May 23, 2005 23:44:19 GMT -5
Should the Palestinians leave? Hell no...well then, should the Israelis leave? look at it this way:
Though I am not pro-zionist in any shape, I fully understand where the Jews are coming from. As Muslims, we have to remember that even though Jersualem is our 3rd holiest city, it is the Jew's ONLY holy city. Thats one reason.
Another reason is because Arabs militarized their legitimate claims in Palestine and are the ones who attacked FIRST, and lost not vice versa...I'm sure they knew of the consequences of losing when they were drawing up their invasion plans...thats unless they want to be patronized and treated as incompetent wily children who would attack and when things dont go their way, have their opponents punished for inflicting retribiution for getting attacked. Now they have less than what they started with during the partition, whose fault is it really?
Thirdly, we have to be honest with ourselves...Jews were there FIRST, and the original Palestinians (a fake identity anyways, as Jordanians=Palestinians) were nothing but the Roman provincial name of the state of Judah ie the Palestinians were the Jews. Jesus was referred to as a Palestinian, was he an Arab or arabic speaking? Of course not ...when the Jews were revolting against the Romans, where were the Arabs? When the Babylonians threw the Jews into babylonian captivity 2,500 years ago, where were the Arabs? Where are Arabs mentioned in Greek, Roman, Assyrian, Persian, any ancient historical record do we find the "Palestinian Arabs"?
How come the Arabic name for Palestine, "Falasteen" is not actually an Arabic word? Its odd for a group of Arabs to be named after an arabized form of a Latin word...
Anyways, Im acting like a devil's advocate because everybody should see it from the other side for once, I believe if both Palestinains and Israelis actually look at the situation from the eyes of their enemies maybe they will resolve this long-standing issue. So this Subliminal idiot should know that 2 wrongs do not make a right, instead of asking the Palestinians to goto Saudi Arabia, why dont he do what I just did and look at it from their point of view?Perhaps, only then would the Arabs understand the pain his people went through when they were kicked out of their homes. That is the only way things get resolved, because in all seriousness both sides have legitimate claims, but anti-semites want no part in listening to the true statements I just listed above, and the un-wavering bullying tactics of the Israelis just shows that they have not learnt a damn thing from all the oppression and anti-semitism they suffered all over the worlf
|
|
|
|
Post by Curious6 on May 24, 2005 7:06:11 GMT -5
Wadaad, it's cool the way you look at the situation from a different perspective.  |
|
|
|
Post by eufrenio on May 24, 2005 8:06:47 GMT -5
Well, if Jews don't have a homeland in Israel, they have no choice but to live elsewhere, and deal with Anti-Semitism. So for this reason, I don't understand why Anti-Semites hate Israel. It also means that as problematic as Israel is (for Israelis, I mean), it might be the best safeguard against Anti-Semitism, and also the best answer to any genocidal anti-Jewish regime that might spring up in the world. Some anti-semites actually love Israel, but for all the wrong reasons from a Jewish point of view! ;D a) they like the idea of a country they can deport all Jews to. b) Some White Nationalists would like to build a country which would mirror Israel in an"Aryan" way. Take a look at this essay: I'm Gonna' Get My Own f*ckin' Israel www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/lettersOct-Nov03/22804edwardjisrael.htmwww.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/lettersOct-Nov03/30204edwardjmoreisrael.htm  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by amksa on May 24, 2005 8:56:19 GMT -5
i don't understand how anti-semitism is automatically associated with muslim.
in france, i noticed that if you're North african, Arabo-Berber or most generally muslim, you have to prove that you're not an anti-semite : do French forget that they were the ones to sell their Jew compatriots to the nazis ? Moroccan never did that, when nazis came in Morocco in order to take some Jews freight, the king of Morocco opposed that, arguing that they weren't Moroccan Jews in Morocco, just Moroccans.
do the eurpeans forget that they all generously participated to the greatness of the Third Reich ?
i think that the word anti-semitism should be replace in its context, its european and white context !
|
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on May 24, 2005 9:00:01 GMT -5
I'm Gonna' Get My Own f*ckin' Israel lol... sounds like a plan. |
|
|
|
Post by Curious6 on May 24, 2005 10:03:22 GMT -5
Moroccan never did that, when nazis came in Morocco in order to take some Jews freight, the king of Morocco opposed that, arguing that they weren't Moroccan Jews in Morocco, just Moroccans. Definitely something we won't forget. |
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on May 24, 2005 13:31:07 GMT -5
Yeah, the Palestinians should all just leave their homeland and go to Saudi Arabia. What sound advice. Most of them have already left, and currently live in the other half (rather 3/4) of their homeland: Jordan. If you weren't such a dork, you'd know that. Jordanians and Palestinian refugees aside, Israeli-Arabs aren't going anywhere. Polling shows that 90% would prefer to stay in Israel if a Palestinian state is created. Wadaad, I agree with everything you said. |
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on May 25, 2005 8:10:22 GMT -5
Quiet, Jew--- err... Quiet, you.  Hey, I agree with you. Give Israel to the Israelis so everyone can shut up about this for a change. I'm just saying if a Native American told me to go back to Europe, I don't think I'd find that to be very sound advice. |
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on May 25, 2005 17:32:26 GMT -5
It's cool.  I don't think the Arabs should leave, just for the record. But I don't think it's possible for them to return to Israel proper. About objectivity and seeing it from the other POV, I think this quote is relevant: "If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" - David Ben-Gurion |
|
|
|
Post by humantag on May 29, 2005 3:18:47 GMT -5
Its not a good analogy though because Israel isn't at all like south africa. For one thing we aren't even dealing with two separate races like caucasoid and negroid. We are dealing with arabs and jews who both belong to the caucasoid race. Noting the fact that the Jews and Palestinians are both Caucasian is irrelevant and in no way invalidates the comparison of Israel to apartheid South Africa. Note that the situation in Northern Ireland has also been compared to apartheid South Africa. Secondly there has always been a jewish and arab presence in palestine. Both groups are indigenous to the land, and both groups have absorbed foreigners into their gene pools. The number of Jews living in what is now called 'Israel' prior to the last century or two was negligible. Not even as chauvinistic a supporter of Israel as Alan Dershowitz attempts to argue that the Jewish claim to Israel can be based on a significant uninterrupted presence in the land since Biblical or even post Biblical times. Whoever regards it as such is greatly misinformed. We all know the majority of jews are a semitic people. The claim to the land is based both on some jews living in it for hundreds and hundreds of years and the ancestral ties of other jews. I spent ten years in NYC and can testify to the fact that Jews are rarely as dark as Italians and often as pale as Irishmen  . Most recent DNA studies of Ashkenazi populations suggest they are in general far more European than 'middle eastern'. But the very fact that so many jews actually belong to other races (Ethiopians etc) and were airlifted to Israel just shows how ludicrous these accusations of "racism" are. Israel is the most tolerant state in the entire middle east. Here's where Jews go schizophrenic. On the one hand, if you suggest that Jews are not by in large Middle Eastern and do not represent a more or less undiluted bloodline of Middle Eastern origin dating to Old Testament times, you are accused of being anti-semitic on the basis of attempting to 'delegitimize' Jews. On the other hand, if you say that Judaism is an ethnically exclusive tribe - in some sense a racist religion - you are quickly denounced as an anti-semite, and it will be argued that the Jews are an extraordinarily diverse lot. *giggle* Come on fellas - you can't have it both ways. |
|
|
|
Post by humantag on May 29, 2005 3:31:25 GMT -5
I mean seriously... Here is a pic of an Israeli jewish soldier and a palestinian arab civilian arguing. How is this apartheid again? Why is this situation even being compared to south africa? South africa shouldn't even enter the equation.  You can cherry pick photos of swarthy Israelis from now till doomsday, and they will still be in someone else's country. [It is interesting to note however that the Israeli soldier in the picture is readily distinguishable from the swarthier Palestinians he is harrassing.] Again, differences or similarities in appearance between the occupying Israelis and indigenous Palestinian population is entirely irrelevant - I don't know why you are so fixated on complexion (though I can speculate). If you are occupying my land, the similarity or difference between your complexion and mine matters little - in fact, it is entirely irrelevant. Again, the Irish and the English are barely distinguishable physically. |
|
|
|
Post by k5125 on May 29, 2005 12:31:02 GMT -5
You can cherry pick photos of swarthy Israelis from now till doomsday, and they will still be in someone else's country. Cherry pick? There are more swarthy Israelis than pale ones. Someone else's country? Palestine has always been both Jewish and Arab country. [It is interesting to note however that the Israeli soldier in the picture is readily distinguishable from the swarthier Palestinians he is harrassing.] Readily distinguishable? You must be joking. And harrassing? How do you even know whats going on? Its a photograph. Again, differences or similarities in appearance between the occupying Israelis and indigenous Palestinian population is entirely irrelevant - I don't know why you are so fixated on complexion (though I can speculate). If you are occupying my land, the similarity or difference between your complexion and mine matters little - in fact, it is entirely irrelevant. Its entirely relevant. People always say that Israelis are always fair and palestinians are always dark, when in reality many if not most Israelis are dark and look very similar to palestinians. Again, the Irish and the English are barely distinguishable physically. Thats the point. They aren't, just like the palestinians and Israelis in many cases. I just can't get over this "cherry picking" comment though. People post pictures of pale Israelis all the time, but when I post pictures of dark Israelis its called "cherry picking"? |
|
|
|
Post by k5125 on May 29, 2005 12:38:42 GMT -5
Noting the fact that the Jews and Palestinians are both Caucasian is irrelevant and in no way invalidates the comparison of Israel to apartheid South Africa. Note that the situation in Northern Ireland has also been compared to apartheid South Africa. Again, its entirely relevant because today you people try to make it look like Jews are all these white people and palestinians are all these brown people of color when in fact both are caucasian and many times very similar looking. The number of Jews living in what is now called 'Israel' prior to the last century or two was negligible. Not even as chauvinistic a supporter of Israel as Alan Dershowitz attempts to argue that the Jewish claim to Israel can be based on a significant uninterrupted presence in the land since Biblical or even post Biblical times. Palestine has been flooded with immigrants from both sides, and it always had Arabs and Jews living in it. Arabs have 22 countries. Jews have 1. What is the probelm? I spent ten years in NYC and can testify to the fact that Jews are rarely as dark as Italians and often as pale as Irishmen . Most recent DNA studies of Ashkenazi populations suggest they are in general far more European than 'middle eastern'. Other genetic tests have stated otherwise, and I have seen more dark looking Ashkenazis than light ones. Most Ashkenazis I grew up around looked like this.  Here's where Jews go schizophrenic. On the one hand, if you suggest that Jews are not by in large Middle Eastern and do not represent a more or less undiluted bloodline of Middle Eastern origin dating to Old Testament times, you are accused of being anti-semitic on the basis of attempting to 'delegitimize' Jews. On the other hand, if you say that Judaism is an ethnically exclusive tribe - in some sense a racist religion - you are quickly denounced as an anti-semite, and it will be argued that the Jews are an extraordinarily diverse lot. *giggle* Come on fellas - you can't have it both ways. Israel is the most diverse place. There are blacks, indians, so many different colored jews. Your claims are just idiotic now. |
|
|
|
Post by k5125 on May 29, 2005 12:45:05 GMT -5
|
|
;D
. Most recent DNA studies of Ashkenazi populations suggest they are in general far more European than 'middle eastern'.