How exactly is Israel "colonizing" a group of nomads that never had a homeland to begin with?
What sort of "vision" requires rocket attacks suicide bombs on school busses and mortar attacks on peaceful neighborhoods?
The Palestinian vision that's what.
Interesting taht you keep finding these ancient never before heard of "experts" and so called "leaders" of the Jewish faith to base your hatred and racism on...instead of looking at official Israeli governmental policy here in the 21st Century.
Is that because if you were honest we'd all see you for the race baiting Islamo nazi supporting bigot you really are?
650,000 (mostly) European Jews inflicted their nation upon 1.2 million Arabs in Palestine in 1948.
700,000 Arabs were evicted from their homes, businesses, and bank accounts by those colonizing their land.
If you're honestly ignorant of Theodor Hetzl's "ancient" contribution to that colonization, try reading.
What part are you having trouble comprehending?
650,000 (mostly) European Jews inflicted their nation upon 1.2 million Arabs in Palestine in 1948.
700,000 Arabs were evicted from their homes, businesses, and bank accounts by those colonizing their land.
If you're honestly ignorant of Theodor Hetzl's "ancient" contribution to that colonization, try reading.
I've heard this kind of stuff before.
After Europe tried their darndest to exterminate the "Jewish Problem" what does george expect the Jews to do now.
We should have just gone quietly to the showers and not caused a fuss...
So if you ask me... Arabs are the ones encroaching.
With an Arab population in Palestine under Israeli control about to reach parity with Jewish numbers, all good Zionists are returning to their roots in search of a solution to their demographic problem: separation or transfer.
"In 1895 Theodor Herzl, Zionism's chief prophet, confided in his diary that he did not favour sharing Palestine with the natives. Better, he wrote, to 'try to spirit the penniless [Palestinian] population across the border by denying it any employment in our own country Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.'
"He was proposing a programme of Palestinian emigration enforced through a policy of strict separation between Jewish immigrants and the indigenous population. In simple terms, he hoped that, once Zionist organisations had bought up large areas of Palestine and owned the main sectors of the economy, Palestinians could be made to leave by denying them rights to work the land or labour in the Jewish-run economy.
"His vision was one of transfer, or ethnic cleansing, through ethnic separation."
What sort of "vision" of national liberation requires building its very existence on the colonization of another people?
One that in each and every case allies itself with the powers of world imperialism.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Zionism's_Dead_End.html
There is just enough truth in this post to mask that the majority of its assumptions are blatantly false. Herzl's assumptions regarding the Arabs were based on the fact that Islam has a historical enmity towards Jews and Judaism, going back to its foundational documents, and as a result, any peaceful coexistence would be almost impossible, but fortunately, there was very little in the way of Arab population. In fact, the original Jewish settlers bought their land from absentee landlords who lacked tenants for farming. The land was fallow and with the exception of a few cities, unpopulated. The Ottoman censuses for the 19th century showed this, and also recorded an important fact, which the Arab apologists ignore, which is that Jerusalem was a Jewish-majority city, despite centuries of dhimmi status. The Arab population began to increase as the Jewish settlers began to irrigate deserts and drain swamps, creating economic opportunities. This is why the Jewish majority cities saw the highest rate of growth in Arab populations, more so than in Arab majority cities.
Another critical point is that the Israelis did not seek to expel the Arabs. Jews actively avoided purchasing populated land, concentrating on uncultivated swamps and deserts, which were cheaper and less likely to displace tenant farmers. In 1920, David Ben-Gurion called the Arab fellahin “the most important asset of the native population,†and “under no circumstances must we touch land belonging to fellahs or worked by them.†“Only if a fellah leaves his place of settlement, should we offer to buy his land, at an appropriate price.†The Partition plan would have created Jewish majority enclaves within the borders of what became Israel, in areas where Jews were already a majority. It was Arab intransigence, the refusal of Muslims to allow any Jewish state, no matter how small, that forced the issue. The Peel Report, issued after the 1936 Arab revolt, identified the causes of the Arab riots:Chapter IV. - The Disturbances of 1936
These disturbances (which are briefly summarized) were similar in character to the four previous outbreaks, although more serious and prolonged. As in 1933, it was not only the Jews who were attacked, but the Palestine Government. A new feature was the part played by the Rulers of the neighbouring Arab States in bringing about the end of the strike.
The underlying causes of the disturbances of 1936 were--
(1) The desire of the Arabs for national independence;
(2) their hatred and fear of the establishment of the Jewish National Home.
These two causes were the same as those of all the previous outbreaks and have always been inextricably linked together. Of several subsidiary factors, the more important were--
(1) the advance of Arab nationalism outside Palestine;
(2) the increased immigration of Jews since 1933;
(3) the opportunity enjoyed by the Jews for influencing public opinion in Britain;
(4) Arab distrust in the sincerity of the British Government;
(5) Arab alarm at the continued Jewish purchase of land;
(6) the general uncertainty as to the ultimate intentions of the Mandatory Power.[/i]
Peel concluded that partition was necessary to keep the peace, but the Arab Muslims (Arab Christians were not hostile to partition) refused.
The neighboring Arab states directed the Muslim population to vacate their homes so that they would have a free hand in their genocidal campaign against the Jews. They weren't driven out by Israelis, they abandoned their homes in order to facilitate genocide. And what you failed to mention was that in the period immediately after the establishment of Israel, the Arab states expelled most of their Jewish populations, usually with just the clothes on their backs, and the property left behind by these refugees could have easily been used to assimilate the Arab refugees, but those states made a deliberate decision to keep the Palestinians in camps, and use them as a propaganda tool. Part of this was based on crass economics. The UN took on the responsibility for feeding the refugees and issued ration cards, and since this was bringing food and money into the camps, the regimes decided to milk this. One trick was to open their jails and transport their indigent to the camps, where they immediately became "Palestinians" (despite never having set foot in Palestine), thus swelling the refugee population. Another was to register people under multiple names, which allowed them to hold multiple ration cards (further swelling the number of refugees). Deceased persons were not declared, so their ration cards remained active (any Cook County voter registrar can tell you how that trick works), and births were falsified.
Finally, there was no such thing as a "Palestinian" until the nomadic Arabs found themselves in camps in the Jordanian and Egyptian occupied zones. The name Palestine came from Roman maps of the region that the British used when they accepted the League of Nations mandate, and that name was the result of the Roman suppression of the last Judean revolt. After the Romans sacked Jersusalem and killed as many Judeans as they could, they imposed a series of punitive measures on the survivors, one of which was the renaming of the province after the hereditary enemy of the Judeans, the Philistines. Thus, Judea became Syria Palestina, or Syrian Palestine. The Jewish presence remained, uninterrupted, in the major cities.
blah blah blah
Well george, where exactly is the mythical nation of "Palestine". Anti semites only seem able to designate palestinian soil if by doing so they can further the anti semite cause.
How exactly is Israel "colonizing" a group of nomads that never had a homeland to begin with?
What sort of "vision" requires rocket attacks suicide bombs on school busses and mortar attacks on peaceful neighborhoods?
The Palestinian vision that's what.
Interesting taht you keep finding these ancient never before heard of "experts" and so called "leaders" of the Jewish faith to base your hatred and racism on...instead of looking at official Israeli governmental policy here in the 21st Century.
Is that because if you were honest we'd all see you for the race baiting Islamo nazi supporting bigot you really are?
blah blah Protocols of the Elders of Zion blah blah drinking the blood of infants blah blah ovens blah blah lampshades
So Europeans invaded ancient Israel and imposed the Diaspora. Then the faggot Europeans wage centuries of pogroms and genocide against the Jews. The Jews get fed up and go home only to find a bunch of clit slitting sub-savages have moved in. The Jews bring civilization and are condemned for it for being thieves and killers.
The faggot Europeans ought to thank God the Jews don't treat them the way they claim the sand rats are justified in treating the Jews.
I like to masturbate to pictures of Ernst Rohm in a diaper
A few things:
1. Exellent points, but I think they'll fall on deaf ears. Facts won't help, here.
2. You need to post more!
We should have just gone quietly to the showers and not caused a fuss...
I've heard this kind of stuff before.
After Europe tried their darndest to exterminate the "Jewish Problem" what does george expect the Jews to do now.
Please don't feed the trolls.
Why don't you tell me what percentage of the 700,000 Arabs purged from the Jewish state were nomads as opposed to the number who were living in the 531 towns destroyed by the numerically superior Israeli forces?
I was wrong to interject Zionism into your thread on Radical Islam.
Hopefully, some of the "Heroes" here aren't afraid of honestly examining similarities between radical belief systems like Islam, Zionism, and American Exceptionalism.
Lords Balfour and Rothschild were clear on the location of Palestine:
"The Balfour Declaration (dated 2 November 1917) was a letter from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild), a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.
"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.[1]"
Jewish mythology was the tool they used to colonize it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration
So ignore the facts and spew more BS? Gotcha.
Oh and if you're gonna just toss out crap like what you said about the "531 towns"...provide a link to back up your specious claim.
every Jew of voting age has the right to cast a ballot in Israeli elections, yet a majority of Arabs living on the same ground currently do not: Jewish state or democratic state?
Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed, were offered Israeli citizenship, but most have refused, not wanting to recognize Israeli sovereignty. They became permanent residents.[12] They have the right to apply for citizenship, are entitled to municipal services, and have municipal voting rights.[13]
Only the fed-up European Jews "went home" to an Arab land populated by 96% non-Jews.
"A land without a people for a people without a land" was their first truth-slitting lie.
Ever heard of Norman Finkelstein?
"Zionist forces committed 33 massacres and destroyed 531 Palestinian towns. Author Norman Finkelstein states: “According to the former director of the Israeli army archives, ‘in almost every village occupied by us during the War... acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes’...Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that ‘every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.’â€9
There's nothing specious about how 650,000 Jews inflicted their nationality upon 1.2 million Arabs in Palestine in 1948.
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/ref-nakba.html (http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/ref-nakba.html)
In an August 2009 article published in CounterPunch, Weir wrote that Ariel Toaff, infamous for his charge that Jews had used gentile blood in religious rituals, was “one of the greatest scholars in his field†and that his blood libel had been based upon “35 years of research.†She argued that the “relentless public and private pressure†Toaff faced as a result of his claims was mainly the result of one thing: Israel’s use of “considerable, worldwide resources to interfere with the investigative process.†For Weir, the public outcry over Toaff’s scholarship only proved that other allegations against Israel – its supposed “harvesting of organs,... rampage against Jenin, attack on the USS Liberty, massacre of Gaza, crushing of Rachel Corrie, [and] torture of American citizens†– must be true as well.
Be prepared when she comes to your campus. She claims to be exposing media bias but in fact, she peddles an unusually virulent anti-Israel message. Even she admits that “It is hard not to sound fanatic, over-wrought, biased. The lie is too big, the repression too complete, the Palestinians’ lives too horrible to write about reasonably.â€[4]
When Weir lectures, she makes inflammatory assertions in a sad, almost monotone voice that makes them seem like incontrovertible facts. She also packs a strong emotional punch through anecdotes and photographs about Palestinian Arab suffering. As one student reported, Weir’s “talk was full of pictures of dead children; most of them were unexplained, just said to be results of Israeli soldiers.….The whole talk was designed to make you feel too bad or too ashamed to question any of her words, no matter how blatantly full of lies they were. I felt uncomfortable raising my hand and telling her that what she said about the history of Israel was all lies…â€[5]
Weir claims that her materials are objective because she and her organization“are directed by Americans without bias and ethnic ties to the regionâ€[6] and because they are not “pressured by powerful special interest groups.â€[7] As these thinly veiled allusions to Jewish control of the media suggest, Weir and her organization have an overwhelming bias: they embrace the Arab view of the conflict and its demonization of Israel. One of their new board members, former Illinois Congressman Paul Findley, has been one of the most outspoken anti-Israel advocates and was dubbed “Israel’s number one enemy on Capitol Hill†before he was ousted from office in 1983.[8]They also have an explicit agenda: persuading Americans to end all support for Israel. “We believe strongly that if Americans knew the truth about Israel and Palestine-about the massive amount of our tax money that is being given away to Israel, and about the human cost of Israel’s American-financed militarism-they would demand an immediate re-thinking of our policies in this region.â€[9]
Weir’s special contribution is her effort to make Americans feel guilty. She argues that US support for Israel “makes us accomplice to war crimes and an accessory to oppression….We [Americans]are driving the violence in this region.â€[10] She presumes that we are not doing so willingly. Rather, media bias has “manipulated†us.[11] If we knew the true facts, we would demand an end to support for Israel. Her mission is to spread what she considers to be the facts.
Weir’s inflammatory assertions and distortions are matched only by her lack of information about the history of Israel and of the conflict.
Those aren't people.
They're Muslims.
I defy you to name 1 nation with a Muslim population that doesn't have a terrorism problem.
Meanwhile, the Jews have done more to advance civilization in the last 2000 years than any singular group in history despite the centuries of persecution.
I'm not throwing away Israel in trade for a bunch of unwashed, murderous sub-savages.
Once again we peel back a little bit of the onion and find more of your lie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel
Again the lack of voting rights you rail against is a self inflicted wound. They could become full citizens of Israel and vote. But their hatred for Israel once again overrides commonsense.
The lack of voting rights stems from the simple fact that a majority of Arabs living under Israeli laws between the river and the sea currently have no right to vote for those (mostly Jews) who are writing the laws.
You seem incapable of refuting the historical fact of 650,000 Jews inflicting their nation upon 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 Palestine.
Do you support a Jewish or an apartheid state in 21st Century Israel?
The lack of voting rights stems from the simple fact that a majority of Arabs living under Israeli laws between the river and the sea currently have no right to vote for those (mostly Jews) who are writing the laws. You seem incapable of refuting the historical fact of 650,000 Jews inflicting their nation upon 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 Palestine. Do you support a Jewish or an apartheid state in 21st Century Israel?
I was wrong to interject Zionism into your thread on Radical Islam.
Hopefully, some of the "Heroes" here aren't afraid of honestly examining similarities between radical belief systems like Islam, Zionism, and American Exceptionalism.
Go back and read where he tries to convince us that Islam, Israel and the U.S. are no different in what their goals for the world are. :mental:
A rather slanted interpretation of his original thesis, which was that Zionism, Radical Islam, and American Exceptionalism (Not Israel or America or Islam) are fundamentally supremacist and exclusionary belief systems. Which is true to a very limited extent,
So did Herr Gator from CU change his name to post here? Sounds like Gator and Georgie have a lot in common.
I was wondering the same thing. All we need now is a long hate filled rant about the IAF attack on the U.S Liberty.
I was wondering the same thing. All we need now is a long hate filled rant about the IAF attack on the U.S Liberty.
Tee it up, Bitch:
http://www.gtr5.com/contact.htm (http://www.gtr5.com/contact.htm)
Tee it up, Bitch:
http://www.gtr5.com/contact.htm (http://www.gtr5.com/contact.htm)
Those aren't people.
They're Muslims.
I defy you to name 1 nation with a Muslim population that doesn't have a terrorism problem.
Meanwhile, the Jews have done more to advance civilization in the last 2000 years than any singular group in history despite the centuries of persecution.
I'm not throwing away Israel in trade for a bunch of unwashed, murderous sub-savages.
Don't you have a Bund meeting to attend?
When people choose to be animals, they lose their humanity.
Exactly the point I was making but Herr Ubermunchkin watched as it sailed over his head.Concur.
How telling.
Tee it up, Bitch:
http://www.gtr5.com/contact.htm (http://www.gtr5.com/contact.htm)
Why are so many people afraid of a tiny postage stamp piece of land with a population of what? Four or five million?
Concur.
I know there have been calls to ban him, but I say if he remains civil, let him stay. We need a dyed in the wool lib/socialist/dem/anti semite to keep us on our toes.
Why are so many people afraid of a tiny postage stamp piece of land with a population of what? Four or five million?Over the centuries Jerusalem has become a superpower of influence.
Over the centuries Jerusalem has become a superpower of influence.
It has been a prize coveted ever more by muslims who fear it's influence and see it as a major stumbling block for the advancement of islamist jihad.
How so? Nothing much has happened there in the last two thousand years.
How so? Nothing much has happened there in the last two thousand years.
"During the 1948 war the new state of Israel was emptied of at least 80 per cent of its indigenous population."
That's because the Arab League countries told Arabs to get out of the newly formed country so they could have unlimited freedom to kill anything that moves and ensure it wouldn't be a fellow Arab.
Yup. Looks like I hit a nerve...bitch. What's the matter Ed...still sore over the verbal ass kicking you took on this at CU?
Question for the Jew hating bigot...
If the Israelis are all about this "apartheid" and exterminating the "Palestinians"...why have they refused every single offer of their own homeland ever offered them?
If all they want is land to call their own why haven't they acce[ted any one of the numerous offers presented to them?
That would include 97% of the Golan and 100% of the Gaza Strip. Everything they had ever wanted right there on a silver platter. All the Egyptian had to do was tell Ehud Barak "yes" and the deal would have been done.
Yet the Egyptian refused to accept demands that HE himself had made.
Why is that?
What DNA evidence have you seen that makes you "think" Muslims are not human beings?
You can't name a nation with or without a Muslim population that doesn't have a terrorism problem today assuming your definition of terrorism includes violence or threats of violence against a civilian population in pursuit of political, ideological or economic goals.
Jews produce genius out of all proportion to their numbers, and that encourages some Jews to believe they are racially superior to other humans, especially Palestinians:
"But if separation was the official policy of Labor Zionism, behind the scenes Ben Gurion and his officials increasingly appreciated that it would not be enough in itself to achieve their goal of a pure ethnic state. Land sales remained low, at about 6 per cent of the territory, and the Jewish-owned parts of the economy relied on cheap Palestinian labour.
"Instead, the Labor Zionists secretly began working on a programme of ethnic cleansing.
"After 1937 and Britain's Peel Report proposing partition of Palestine, Ben Gurion was more open about transfer, recognising that a Jewish state would be impossible unless most of the indigenous population was cleared from within its borders.
"Israel's new historians have acknowledged Ben Gurion's commitment to transfer. As Benny Morris notes, for example, Ben Gurion 'understood that there could be no Jewish state with a large and hostile Arab minority in its midst.'
"The Israeli leadership therefore developed a plan for ethnic cleansing under cover of war, compiling detailed dossiers on the communities that needed to be driven out and then passing on the order, in Plan Dalet, to commanders in the field.
"During the 1948 war the new state of Israel was emptied of at least 80 per cent of its indigenous population."
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Zionism's_Dead_End.html (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Zionism's_Dead_End.html)
Do you want to look at how the leaders of the Jewish Agency in Palestine responded to Hitler's victims?
Here's my view, what's yours?
"To the leaders of the Jewish Agency, the rise of fascism had a definite upside.
"Menahem Ussishkin told a Zionist Executive meeting, "There is something positive in their tragedy and that is that Hitler oppressed them as a race and not as a religion. Had he done the latter, half the Jews in Germany would simply have converted to Christianity.'
"In 1934, Labor Zionist Moshe Beilinson went to Germany and reported back to the Labor Party, 'The streets are paved with more money than we have ever dreamed of in the history of our Zionist enterprise. Here is an opportunity to build and flourish like none we have ever had or ever will have.'
"Specifically, 'the opportunity' meant the potential for thousands of new immigrants and their assets to come flooding into Palestine.
"However, Zionist officials were quite blunt in stating that they didn't want all the refugees from Hitler's Holocaust.
"They didn't want the burden of absorbing millions of impoverished sick refugees who had no ideological passion for Palestine. The Agency only wanted young, healthy Jews who could come over and work and fight and build the state. As Israeli historian Tom Segev writes,
"Urban life was, in their [Zionist leaders] eyes, a symptom of social and moral degeneration; returning to the land would give birth to the 'new man' they hoped to create in Palestine. In parceling our the immigration certificates, they therefore gave preference to those who could play a role in their program for building the country. They preferred healthy young Zionists."
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Hidden_Roots_Zionism.html (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Hidden_Roots_Zionism.html)
If you're talking about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_IIOslo II, Arafat rejected that "historic trade" because he would have suffered the same fate as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_RabinYitzhak Rabin if he hadn't.Noam Chomsky? Seriously? :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
Oslo II divided the West Bank into three areas, A, B, and C. Area C which contains all Jewish settlements takes up about 73% of the entire West Bank. Jews are the majority there, and it's likely to be the next annexation to take place in Palestine.
Areas A and B are "Palestinian controlled" yet subject to IDF incursions at any time.
The basic terms of Oslo II reaffirm the Cairo accords of 1994 which stipulate "that the Israeli Military Administration retains exclusive authority in 'legislation, adjudication, (and) policy execution...'"
In exchange, Arafat was required to renounce the Right of Return and recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
Such a deal; give up two-thirds of Palestine and the right of return or compensation for what's been taken by force of arms.
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199601--.htm
Here's my view, what's yours?
Noam Chomsky? Seriously? :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:I like what you did there.
If you're talking about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_IIOslo II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_II), Arafat rejected that "historic trade" because he would have suffered the same fate as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_RabinYitzhak Rabin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_Rabin) if he hadn't.
Oslo II divided the West Bank into three areas, A, B, and C. Area C which contains all Jewish settlements takes up about 73% of the entire West Bank. Jews are the majority there, and it's likely to be the next annexation to take place in Palestine.
Areas A and B are "Palestinian controlled" yet subject to IDF incursions at any time.
The basic terms of Oslo II reaffirm the Cairo accords of 1994 which stipulate "that the Israeli Military Administration retains exclusive authority in 'legislation, adjudication, (and) policy execution...'"
In exchange, Arafat was required to renounce the Right of Return and recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
Such a deal; give up two-thirds of Palestine and the right of return or compensation for what's been taken by force of arms.
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199601--.htm (http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199601--.htm)
I'm not sure who Ed is or what CU stands for, but anytime you want a thread about Israel's deliberate attack on the Liberty, Ill be happy to contribute. :fuelfire:
I like what you did there.
I haven't seen your introduction thread. I will look for it, and definitely welcome you.
He's been here since about the beginning of this site, so I doubt there is an intro thread.
Lol. Find the 2008 welcome thread... :-)
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,12314.msg150230.html#msg150230
Yours is the third post in there. :tongue:
Noam Chomsky? Seriously? :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
Care to seriously refute any of his serious content?
Chomsky was one of the chief deniers of the Cambodian genocide of the 1970s, which took place in the wake of the Communist victory and American withdrawal from Indochina. He directed vitriolic attacks towards the reporters and witnesses who testified to the human catastrophe that was taking place there. Initially, Chomsky tried to minimize the deaths (a “few thousandâ€) and compared those killed by Pol Pot and his followers to the collaborators who had been executed by resistance movements in Europe at the end of World War II. By 1980, however, it was no longer possible to deny that some 2 million of Cambodia's 7.8 million people had perished at the hands of the Communists. But Professor Chomsky continued to deny the genocide, proposing that the underlying problem may have been a failure of the rice crop. As late as 1988, Chomsky returned to the subject and insisted that whatever had happened in Cambodia, the U.S. was to blame.
Professor Chomsky has denounced every U.S. President from Woodrow Wilson and FDR to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton as the front men in “four-year dictatorships†by a ruling class. In his view, the U.S., led by a series of lesser Hitlers, picked up where the Nazis left off after they were defeated in 1945. According to Chomsky, a case could be made for impeaching every President since World War II because “they’ve all been either outright war criminals or involved in serious war crimes.â€
Chomsky also detests the state of Israel, a country he regards as playing the role of Little Satan to the American Great Satan and functioning strategically as an “offshore military and technology base for the United States.â€
According to the website Stand4Facts.org, Chomsky has made the following statements about Israel, Jews, and the Holocaust:
“I see no anti-Semitic implications in denial of the existence of gas chambers, or even denial of the holocaust. Nor would there be anti-Semitic implications, per se, in the claim that the holocaust (whether one believes it took place or not) is being exploited, viciously so, by apologists for Israeli repression and violence.â€
“I objected to the founding of Israel as a Jewish state. I don't think a Jewish or Christian or Islamic state is a proper concept. I would object to the United States as a Christian state.â€
Israel is “a state based on the principle of discrimination. There is no other way for a state with non-Jewish citizens to remain a Jewish state…â€
“Israel is virtually a U.S. military base, an offshoot of the U.S. military system.â€
“There are a great many horrible regimes in the world. To take just one, the world's longest military occupation. There's little doubt that those under the military occupation would be much better off if the occupation were terminated. Does it follow that we should bomb Tel Aviv?â€
“Of course [suicide bombers are] terrorists and there's been Palestinian terrorism all the way through. I have always opposed it….But it's very small as compared with the U.S.-backed Israeli terrorism.â€
“I mean you’d have to go back to the worst days of the American South to know what it’s been like for the Palestinians in the occupied territories.â€
“What this wall [separation barrier] is really doing is…helping turn Palestinian communities into dungeons, next to which the bantustans of South Africa look like symbols of freedom, sovereignty and self-determination.â€
Of a pattern with this animus toward Israel is Chomsky’s involvement with neo-Nazis and Holocaust revisionism. This saga began in 1980 with Chomsky’s support of Robert Faurisson, a French anti-Semite who was fired by the University of Lyon for his hate-filled screeds. (“The alleged Hitlerite gas chambers and the alleged genocide of the Jews form one and the same historical lie,†Faurisson wrote.) Chomsky penned a preface to a book by Faurisson, explaining that the latter was an “apolitical liberal†whose work was based on “extensive historical research†and contained “no hint of anti-Semitic implications.â€
Yes I would.
So when real holocausts like the Killing Fields take place ol Noam is the first one up to defend Communism and deny anything really happened. It's a recurring theme with this self hating ass clown.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1232
No wonder an anti-Semitic radical Islam loving bigot like you would cite him. He denies the Holocaust and sides with neo Nazi's to justify hatred against his own people.
You must be so proud.
Would you?
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1232Your source: (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1232)
"'I objected to the founding of Israel as a Jewish state. I don't think a Jewish or Christian or Islamic state is a proper concept. I would object to the United States as a Christian state.'â€
Would you?
Nations have the right to their own values. If a state wants to establish itself as a homeland for a deposed people, it has that right, and if those people share a common set of religious values, then the state has the right to incorporate that. What is objectionable is when that state does not extend rights of conscience to religious or ethnic minorities, which is the case in most Islamic states, but very few Christian ones, and not at all in the case of the sole Jewish one. I notice, BTW, that you have no objection to the Islamic states which seek to obliterate the non-Islamic states or communities around them, which include Israel, India, Thailand, Nigeria Egypt's Copts, Iran's B'Hais and any European country that has a significant Muslim population. If Israel is the problem, how do you explain that there is no peaceful border between any Islamic entity and anyone else in the world?
When Herzl took up the cause of Zionism, there were numerous self-determination movements going on around the world, many of which were within the Ottoman Empire (although the Hapsburg Empire came in for its share). The defeated powers of WWI ended up seeing their imperial possessions divested, with many forming newly independent or restored states, such as Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Armenia and assorted Arab states. Many proved to be viable, but not all, and some were under constant attack by the nations that lost territory in their making or which had historic enmities against them. BTW, if the British had not reneged on their promises of independent Arab states, much of the hatred of the Arabs towards Israel would have been avoided.
Oh, and yes, Chomsky is a complete tool. Quoting him on anything other than his field of expertise, linguistics, is like consulting a broken clock at any time other than the two moments when it is correct.
So far,you've provided no reason why I should believe you have more expertise about the Middle East than Chomsky does.
Could be because Ody's Jewish?
Nah...couldn't be because of that.
:whatever:
Ody makes a lot of good points and displays an informed perspective about the Middle East.
If he's Jewish, I'm not surprised, but he still doesn't have the knowledge and expertise Chomsky does about Zionism
Ody makes a lot of good points and displays an informed perspective about the Middle East.Chomsky is a hack in the same vein as Trotsky, and Alinsky.
If he's Jewish, I'm not surprised, but he still doesn't have the knowledge and expertise Chomsky does about Zionism
Lol. Find the 2008 welcome thread... :-)
Ody makes a lot of good points and displays an informed perspective about the Middle East.
If he's Jewish, I'm not surprised, but he still doesn't have the knowledge and expertise Chomsky does about Zionism
Chomsky is a hack in the same vein as Trotsky, and Alinsky.
Not to mention Plato, Freud, Cicero, and another hack named Shakespeare:
"Between 1980 and 1992, Chomsky was cited within the field of Arts and Humanities more often than any other living scholar, and eighth overall within the Arts and Humanities Citation Index during the same period.[14][15][16][17] He has been described as a prominent cultural figure, and was voted the 'world's top public intellectual' in a 2005 poll."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky)
Not to mention Plato, Freud, Cicero, and another hack named Shakespeare:Gore and owebuma won Nobel peace prizes. Popular acclaim by libs doesn't make a lib accomplished.
"Between 1980 and 1992, Chomsky was cited within the field of Arts and Humanities more often than any other living scholar, and eighth overall within the Arts and Humanities Citation Index during the same period.[14][15][16][17] He has been described as a prominent cultural figure, and was voted the 'world's top public intellectual' in a 2005 poll."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky)
Not to mention Plato, Freud, Cicero, and another hack named Shakespeare:
"Between 1980 and 1992, Chomsky was cited within the field of Arts and Humanities more often than any other living scholar, and eighth overall within the Arts and Humanities Citation Index during the same period.[14][15][16][17] He has been described as a prominent cultural figure, and was voted the 'world's top public intellectual' in a 2005 poll."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky)
Gore and owebuma won Nobel peace prizes. Popular acclaim by libs doesn't make a lib accomplished.
Gore and Barry ( not to mention Dick, Dubya, and Bubba) are intellectual midgets by comparison.
As I understand Chomsky's eighth overall ranking within the Arts and Humanities Index between 1980 and 1992 means that Noam was the only living human beings on an all-time top ten list of intellectual luminaries.
Most of those citations were due to his Linguistic research; however, his political and philosophical works were also widely quoted and read.
Gore and Barry ( not to mention Dick, Dubya, and Bubba) are intellectual midgets by comparison.
As I understand Chomsky's eighth overall ranking within the Arts and Humanities Index between 1980 and 1992 means that Noam was the only living human beings on an all-time top ten list of intellectual luminaries.
Most of those citations were due to his Linguistic research; however, his political and philosophical works were also widely quoted and read.
You're still not showing anything that shows why we should take his racist hatred towards Israel seriously.
All you're proving is that you're incapable of original thought and can only cut and paste crap that's easily disproven.
Show me how easily you cn disprove this cut and paste:
"Between 1980 and 1992, Chomsky was cited within the field of Arts and Humanities more often than any other living scholar, and eighth overall within the Arts and Humanities Citation Index during the same period.[14][15][16][17]"
Then provide some proof of Chomsky's "racist hatred toward Israel."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky)
Other than being a linguistics expert...what possible expertise does that Communist hack have about Judaism that Ody wouldn't?
Oh wait...that's just your way of dismissing someone who is obviously smarter than you...who can cite things from first hand knowledge while you're busy cutting and pasting useless bigoted crap from Arab based websites.
Idiot. :whatever:
Seriously, if I were to assume that there is actually a problem what do you propose as a resolution?
Problem...what problem? :banghead:
So, back from vacation--who's the troll who needs dickpunched?
Show me how easily you cn disprove this cut and paste:
"Between 1980 and 1992, Chomsky was cited within the field of Arts and Humanities more often than any other living scholar, and eighth overall within the Arts and Humanities Citation Index during the same period.[14][15][16][17]"
Then provide some proof of Chomsky's "racist hatred toward Israel."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky)
Oh please...
I suppose you are just bitterly complaining about the Jewish presence as an intellectual exercise right?
But, I can see why you wouldn't want to answer the question.
I'm taling about your racist anti Semitic pro terrorist crap.
My question about Chomsky remains the same...what qualifies him to be an expert on the situation...other than he shares your narrow minded bigoted views?
Ask Hugo.
"At the start of his speech Wednesday, during which Chavez referred to President Bush as 'the devil,' Chavez held up a book by Noam Chomsky, 'Hegemony or Survival: America?s Quest for Global Dominance,' and recommended it to everyone in the General Assembly, as well as to the American people.
"'I call upon all American brothers and sisters to read the book so they can know about the devil they have at home', said Chavez in direct reference to US president George W. Bush.
"On Thursday afternoon, 'Hegemony or Survival,' originally published in 2003, had jumped into the top 10 of Amazon and Barnes & Noble.com. , ballooning from its original 160.772 position out of the millions of titles offered by the two editing companies."
http://en.mercopress.com/2006/09/21/noam-chomsky-makes-it-to-the-best-sellers-list (http://en.mercopress.com/2006/09/21/noam-chomsky-makes-it-to-the-best-sellers-list)
Best-selling authors often prove their expertise of a given situation in the market place.
Ask Hugo.
"At the start of his speech Wednesday, during which Chavez referred to President Bush as 'the devil,' Chavez held up a book by Noam Chomsky, 'Hegemony or Survival: America?s Quest for Global Dominance,' and recommended it to everyone in the General Assembly, as well as to the American people.
"'I call upon all American brothers and sisters to read the book so they can know about the devil they have at home', said Chavez in direct reference to US president George W. Bush.
"On Thursday afternoon, 'Hegemony or Survival,' originally published in 2003, had jumped into the top 10 of Amazon and Barnes & Noble.com. , ballooning from its original 160.772 position out of the millions of titles offered by the two editing companies."
http://en.mercopress.com/2006/09/21/noam-chomsky-makes-it-to-the-best-sellers-list (http://en.mercopress.com/2006/09/21/noam-chomsky-makes-it-to-the-best-sellers-list)
Best-selling authors often prove their expertise of a given situation in the market place.
Wait...Hugo Chavez??? Now you've reached the bottom of the barrel, kicked it out of the way and started digging where it was. But, please keep showing us just what a useless idiot for the left you truly are.
YOu're kidding right? A despot like the late and thankfully dead Hugo Chavez is your "proof" Chomsky is qualified to speak on Isreal and the situation with the palestinians?
You're more delusional than I thought.
Oh please...
I suppose you are just bitterly complaining about the Jewish presence as an intellectual exercise right?
But, I can see why you wouldn't want to answer the question.
I can see where a solution to the Jewish presence in Palestine begins with an understanding of which side profits more from war than peace. The corporate spin has always held Israel has pursued peace while Arabs prefer (losing) one war after another. There's an alternative view on the left that claims major Arab states proposed a settlement to the Jewish occupation of Palestine at the UNSC in 1976:
"The basic principles have been accepted by virtually the entire world, including the Arab states (who go on to call for full normalization of relations), the Organization of Islamic States (including Iran), and relevant non-state actors (including Hamas). A settlement along these lines was first proposed at the U.N. Security Council in January 1976 by the major Arab states.
"Israel refused to attend the session.
"The U.S. vetoed the resolution, and did so again in 1980..."
We're not likely to agree on my source
Can you see an independent source for this claim we might agree on?
http://chomsky.info/articles/20100427.htm (http://chomsky.info/articles/20100427.htm)
What I want to know is when Georgie is renouncing his US citizenship and leaving the country? Judging by his posts, he seems to hate America with every fiber of his worthless soul.
Another thing is why haven't Georgie's two idiotic threads been moved to the Mind Numbing Stupidity forum and where they belong? If any thread fit the bill it would be those two
The more this anti-semite continues to quote Chomsky and beat the same disproven dead horse about Israel...I'm becoming convinced it a green card not his Citizenship he's gonna have to give up.
1948 Mandate Palestine.
650,000 Jews.
1.2 million Arabs.
Jewish state?????
1948 Mandate Palestine.
650,000 Jews.
1.2 million Arabs.
Jewish state?????
:beathorse:1948 Mandate Palestine.:beathorse:
650,000 Jews.
1.2 million Arabs.
Jewish state?????
Ask Hugo.Popularity isn't expertise. You must have been one of the pet rock buyers. You make Chavez your hero, and Bush the devil. Your character has been made very clear by you, and it is wanting.
"At the start of his speech Wednesday, during which Chavez referred to President Bush as 'the devil,' Chavez held up a book by Noam Chomsky, 'Hegemony or Survival: America?s Quest for Global Dominance,' and recommended it to everyone in the General Assembly, as well as to the American people.
"'I call upon all American brothers and sisters to read the book so they can know about the devil they have at home', said Chavez in direct reference to US president George W. Bush.
"On Thursday afternoon, 'Hegemony or Survival,' originally published in 2003, had jumped into the top 10 of Amazon and Barnes & Noble.com. , ballooning from its original 160.772 position out of the millions of titles offered by the two editing companies."
http://en.mercopress.com/2006/09/21/noam-chomsky-makes-it-to-the-best-sellers-list (http://en.mercopress.com/2006/09/21/noam-chomsky-makes-it-to-the-best-sellers-list)
Best-selling authors often prove their expertise of a given situation in the market place.
My question about Chomsky remains the same...what qualifies him to be an expert on the situation...other than he shares your narrow minded bigoted views?
More of just an oddity then anything, vehemently disagrees with the presence of Israel and likes to quote Noam Chomsky and wiki.
1948 U.N. Resolution 181. Palestinians offered their own state.UNGR 181 was non-binding and never implemented hence the indigenous Arab population of Mandate Palestine had two good reasons to reject an offer which gave 55% of their land to one-third of the population. Why don't you explain where the UN got moral/legal authority from that entitled them to make any offer to the indigenous Semites of Palestine?
The refused and chose to invade Israel.
They chose poorly.
UNGR 181 was non-binding and never implemented hence the indigenous Arab population of Mandate Palestine had two good reasons to reject an offer which gave 55% of their land to one-third of the population. Why don't you explain where the UN got moral/legal authority from that entitled them to make any offer to the indigenous Semites of Palestine?
It wasn't implemented you ignorant prig because the Arabs refused to recognize a Jewish state. They vowed to wipe the Jews off the face of the earth before they'd ever recognize Israel.What part of self-determination gets your panties in a bunch?
What part of the Palestinians did it to themselves is so damn hard for you to get through your racist skull?
What part of self-determination gets your panties in a bunch?
Arab Palestinians didn't recognize western imperialists giving 55% of their land to Zionist hordes from Europe.
What would you have done...kiss the first Jew ass that waddled by?
Sure you would.
Chomsky is the same kind of Jew as Soros is. Both are anti American and anti Israel.
Michael Medved wrote a book on these types of Jews.
I don't know why this dude is so in love with Chomsky, but what else can you expect out of our liberal educational system.
Nothing. I'm all for it. But I don't blame someone else if I choose not to use it.
It wasn't their land to begin with dumbass. The two states were taken from land in Trans-Jordan and Egypt. There was no Palestinian lan to be stolen.
I don't kiss anyone's ass Jew, Christian or sh*thead bigot like you.
You're all for self-determination?
"self-de·ter·mi·na·tion (slfd-tûrm-nshn)
n.
1. Determination of one's own fate or course of action without compulsion; free will.
2. Freedom of the people of a given area to determine their own political status; independence."
Then explain why you support the UN decision to prevent Jews and Arabs from determining their own political status in 1948 Palestine?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/self-determination (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/self-determination)
For the umpteenth time, what part of "The Arab squatters on Israeli land made their choice in 1948" don't you understand? They chose to cling to their hatred of Jews, instead of accepting territory of their own.Some of those that you call "Arab squatters" had ancestors living continuously in Palestine for 1500 years before 1948.
Some of those that you call "Arab squatters" had ancestors living continuously in Palestine for 1500 years before 1948.
Those Jooos you hate so much had ancestors live in that area continuously for 5000 years. Who came first, fool, Muzzies? Or those Jooos you despise so much?I'm no expert, but I strongly suspect both groups of modern-day Jews and Arabs had common ancestors living between the River and the sea for thousands of years before either religion lurched into existence. The question that needs answering right now isn't about who was there first; it's about whether all those currently living on that tiny slice of real estate will live in a Jewish state or a democratic state.
live in a Jewish state or a democratic state.
I'm no expert, but I strongly suspect both groups of modern-day Jews and Arabs had common ancestors living between the River and the sea for thousands of years before either religion lurched into existence. The question that needs answering right now isn't about who was there first; it's about whether all those currently living on that tiny slice of real estate will live in a Jewish state or a democratic state.
I'm no expert
You're all for self-determination?
"self-de·ter·mi·na·tion (slfd-tûrm-nshn)
n.
1. Determination of one's own fate or course of action without compulsion; free will.
2. Freedom of the people of a given area to determine their own political status; independence."
Then explain why you support the UN decision to prevent Jews and Arabs from determining their own political status in 1948 Palestine?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/self-determination (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/self-determination)
Some of those that you call "Arab squatters" had ancestors living continuously in Palestine for 1500 years before 1948.
And the Jews were there before the New Testament. You in your limited knowledge on the subject seem to think Israel just sprang up one day in 1948 and had never existed before that.You're saying that Jews alone, among all nations, are entitled to land their ancestors conquered thousands of years ago?
You're saying that Jews alone, among all nations, are entitled to land their ancestors conquered thousands of years ago?
“All [that Palestinians] can agree on as a community is what they want to destroy, not what they want to build.â€1 New York Times Columnist Thomas Friedman
^I'll bet george won't even bother to read that.
Great job, TRG. Hi-5. :thumbs:I'm like you in learning the specifics, but the generalities, that the muslims are propagandists who are constantly lying cheating and trying to steal I knew almost instinctively.
Am learning a ton here with this. Unlike our pal george, I might add.
I'm like you in learning the specifics, but the generalities, that the muslims are propagandists who are constantly lying cheating and trying to steal I knew almost instinctively.
I'm like you in learning the specifics, but the generalities, that the muslims are propagandists who are constantly lying cheating and trying to steal I knew almost instinctively.
The absolutely frightening thing is that we have people in our own government...in positions to make policy decisions in that part of the world that have the same view on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict that this racist sh*tbag does.I would agree with you at the "disenfranchised" level. But the higher someone goes on the power especially political power scale the more they use ideology to advance their agenda. I believe they do it very disingenuously as well.
I'm like you in learning the specifics, but the generalities, that the muslims are propagandists who are constantly lying cheating and trying to steal I knew almost instinctively.
The myth of Palestinian nationhoodA Land Without A People for a People Without a Land?
Not only do the Palestinians admit that they are not a discrete sociological entity, i.e., a people.
They also concede that as a political unit, i.e., a nation, their demands and aspirations as are neither genuine nor permanent.
Thus Muhsin candidly confessed: “It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity, because it is in the interest of the Arabs to encourage a separate Palestinian identity. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel [sic].â€
Doesn’t get much more explicit than that! Indeed the Palestinians not only affirm that their national demands are bogus, but that they are only a temporary instrumental ruse.
In the current National Covenant they declare: “The Palestinian people are a part of the Arab Nation... [and] believe in Arab unity... however, they must, at the present stage of their struggle, safeguard their Palestinian identity and develop their consciousness of that identity.â€
So how are we to avoid concluding that at a later stage there will be no need to preserve their identity or develop consciousness thereof? How are we to avoid concluding that Palestinian identity is merely a short-term ruse to achieve a political goal of annulling the “illegal 1947 partition of Palestine,†(i.e. Israel).
As King Hussein said: “The appearance of the Palestinian national personality comes as an answer to Israel’s claim that Palestine is Jewish.â€
Nothing more.
The myth of Palestinian peoplehood
Senior Palestinian leaders have admitted – openly, consistently and continually – that Palestinians are not a discrete people identifiably different from others in the Arab world.
For example, on March 14, 1977, Farouk Kadoumi, head of the PLO Political Department, told Newsweek: “Jordanians and Palestinians are considered by the PLO as one people.â€
The myth of a Palestinian homeland
Article 16 of the original version of the Palestinian National sets out the desire of the people of Palestine, “who look forward to... restoring the legitimate situation to Palestine, establishing peace and security in its territory, and enabling its people to exercise national sovereignty...â€
However, since the Covenant was adopted in 1964, well before Israel “occupied†a square inch of the “West Bank†or Gaza, the question is precisely what is meant by “its territory†in which the Palestinians were “looking forward...to exercise national sovereignty.†Indeed in Article 24, they state specifically what this territory did not include, and where they were not seeking to exercise “national sovereignty.â€
In it they explicitly proclaim that they do not desire to “exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, [or] on the Gaza Strip.â€
From this we learn two stunning facts. Not only did the Palestinians not claim the “West Bank†and Gaza as part of their homeland, but they specifically excluded them from it. Moreover, they explicitly acknowledged – and accepted –that the “West Bank†belonged to another sovereign entity, the Hashemite Kingdom.
There is thus not the slightest resemblance – indeed not even one square inch of overlap – between the territory claimed by the Palestinians as their “homeland†when they first formulated their national aspirations and the “homeland†allegedly envisaged/claimed today.
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/UN-nation-un-nation-non-nation-anti-nation
I was speaking more of the Balcourt document and the 55% deal that Ody clarified; along with some of the outcomes of WWI with respect to the Ottoman Empire.That's not a new spot for Zionist colonizers to find themselves in, especially the neighbors who were living there first:
I knew that the Ottoman Empire took it in the shorts after WWI, but some of the details were not clear.
Regarding the muzzies, however, you're spot on. Not hard to see that and most specifically, it's not difficult to see how Israel can and should be utterly ruthless with dealing with its "neighbors."
Chomsky has never denied the Holocaust.
He supports the free speech rights of those who are ignorant enough to question its historical reality.
As a Jew growing up during WWII in Philadelphia, Noam was caught between racist bigots who celebrated the Fall of Paris with beer parties, and his friends from school who condemned Chomsky for not taunting and throwing rocks at Nazi POWs.
From at least 1984 through 1992, [Noam] Chomsky corresponded with a man who, during those time periods, was one of the leading authors and editors in the Holocaust denial movement. And it was a very friendly correspondence, complete with praise for the denier’s work, and an offer of assistance on Chomsky’s part.http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/136465.html
The denier in question is L.A. “Lou†Rollins.
In the first of the recently uncovered letters, Chomsky expresses happiness that Rollins was able to find Chomsky’s anti-Israel book “The Fateful Triangle†useful in his work. Chomsky tells Rollins that he’s pleased to hear that he (Rollins) is writing about Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, who Chomsky proceeds to call “one of the major frauds of our time.†He compares Wiesel to Nazi collaborators, and accuses him of “exploiting the Holocaust to justify oppression and murder.â€
Chomsky promises to send Rollins “news clippings from the Jewish press†to assist him with his anti-Wiesel screed (Rollins’ Chomsky-assisted essay would appear in the fall 1985 edition of the IHR’s “journalâ€).
Chomsky closes by writing, “I’m looking forward to hearing more about your study.â€...
A Land Without A People for a People Without a Land?
Although Palestinian nationalism began finding its overt expressions in the first decade of the 20th Century, far-sighted Zionist colonizers could see the clouds gathering:
"The most prominent of these was the renowned Zionist thinker Ahad Ha’am, who drew his colleagues’ attention to the burgeoning problem already in 1891 in the article 'Truth from the Land of Israel' which he wrote after a visit he paid to the early Zionist settlements in Palestine.
"'The Jews abroad tend to consider all Arabs as desert savages [ ... ] but this is a serious mistake, the Arabs like all children of Shem have sharp minds and are resourceful,' Ahad Ha’am wrote then, 100 years ago.
"He noticed that initially many Arabs were friendly to the Jews since the scope of Jewish colonization was still very small and did not seem to them to present a real menace. 'But when the time will come and the Jews will develop in this country and will start to displace the Arabs, they will not quit the land so easily.'"
In fact, the Jewish colonization of Palestine could not have happened without the deep pockets and big guns of the dominant global empires of their times: The British between 1917 and 1947 and the US since 1967.
http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=543
Again with the biased sources. The Palestine Israel Journal? Really?Racists deny an Arab presence in Palestine or Filastin or Palestina that had been documented for centuries before 1948:
You're not even trying to present an unbiased argument. But then again most racists never do.
Again there was no colonization. It never was "Palestinian" land. There was no self identifying "Palestinian" people until the mid 60's.
Thus Muhsin candidly confessed: “It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity, because it is in the interest of the Arabs to encourage a separate Palestinian identity. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel [sic].â€
Doesn’t get much more explicit than that! Indeed the Palestinians not only affirm that their national demands are bogus, but that they are only a temporary instrumental ruse.
Senior Palestinian leaders have admitted – openly, consistently and continually – that Palestinians are not a discrete people identifiably different from others in the Arab world.
For example, on March 14, 1977, Farouk Kadoumi, head of the PLO Political Department, told Newsweek: “Jordanians and Palestinians are considered by the PLO as one people.â€
http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/136465.htmlHere's Chomsky's letter.
Link to the letter: http://www.countercontempt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/IMG.pdf
So, want to try that again? Or do you wish to claim ignorance and willful obtuseness?
What's it like, george, being consumed like that? Do you have trouble sleeping at night? Do you agonize about the Joooooos and plot their destruction through nefarious and diabolical means?
Mustn't get our hands dirty, after all. :whatever:
The denial of the "Palestinian" people wasn't started by Israel...it was denied by the Arabs as well.http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/UN-nation-un-nation-non-nation-anti-nationYour link: (http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/UN-nation-un-nation-non-nation-anti-nation)
Since you didn't red it the first time....read it now:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/UN-nation-un-nation-non-nation-anti-nation
There it is in plain easy to understand quotes from fellow bigots like yourself. But go ahead and continue to to insulate yourself from the cold hard facts with some nice warm racial hatred.
Idiot. :whatever:
Jewish rulers inflicting their nationality on the homeland of Arab Filastin (Palestine) is the core of Israeli apartheid.
I wonder if he even cares how many Jewish people he speaks to on a daily basis without knowing it?Hi, Bucky.
Hi, I'm Bucky Goldberg.
****nut.
Hi, Bucky.
I'm wondering whether you know if I'm a Jew?
Hi, Bucky.
I'm wondering whether you know if I'm a Jew?
Hi, Bucky.
I'm wondering whether you know if I'm a Jew?
Hi, Bucky.Big meeting tonight at the ALL a who Hock Bar. It's a converted nazi gas shower. It's all the rage. Refreshments will be served. See you there george ?
I'm wondering whether you know if I'm a Jew?
Big meeting tonight at the ALL a who Hock Bar. It's a converted nazi gas shower. It's all the rage. Refreshments will be served. See you there george ?
Oh golly gee, how embarassing.Aww shucks, Goldie.
Yeah, not so much. Quit polluting my state and GTFO already. Unlike you, I AM a rarity in the world--1--a NATIVE Californian, 2--a conservative. Not sure which is more rare than the other, but put them together, and well, you get the idea.
Personally, I could give two shits whether or not you're Jewish. I do, OTOH, care that you're a mouth-breathing, sister-****ing, booger-eating idiot.
Bottom line, george? Quit jacking the bandwidth, fag.
Aww shucks, Goldie.
I was hoping for some kosher espresso.
Maybe you should stop taking your AIDs meds and just die?
Why would you suddenly bring up AIDS Sweetie, did you get it from a dirty needle or some other form of penetration?
The turd in the punchbowl finally floated to the top.Is he gone ? If he is good riddance (Green Day). I just thought of something, while I am opposed in general to banning, if one deserves banning I hope it happens before 1,000 posts, that way they can't access more personal areas of the forum.
And got banned.
Is he gone ? If he is good riddance (Green Day). I just thought of something, while I am opposed in general to banning, if one deserves banning I hope it happens before 1,000 posts, that way they can't access more personal areas of the forum.
The turd in the punchbowl finally floated to the top.
And got banned.
Here's Chomsky's letter.
Do you want to refute any of it or provide primary examples of Rollin's Holocaust denial?
http://www.countercontempt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/IMG.pdf (http://www.countercontempt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/IMG.pdf)
****nuts had plenty of time to spread his filth. 110 posts worth. He can't say he was silenced. That's about 109 more posts than we'd get at DU while speaking our true feelings.
Bye dickhead.
Maybe his two-week ban at his other site was up. :whatever:Does that mean he left voluntarily, or involuntarily ?
Does that mean he left voluntarily, or involuntarily ?