Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

On Israel-'Palestine'

ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2013 9:35:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"palestinian" common family names:

Just like "Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti" born in "tikrit iraq"
The family names(Nisbah نسبة) of Arabs whoA279;A279; now occupyA279; judeaA279; reveal their country of origin:
"Masri" OR "al-masri" =from Egypt ,Hamas member of Parliament in gaza, Mushir al-Masri (the word "masri" littelery means "the egyption" in arabic !).

"Khamis"= from Bahrain "Salem Hanna Khamis"
"al-ubayyidi" or "al-Obeidi"= from sudan "al-ubayyid"
"al-Faruqi"= Mosul iraq
"al-Araj" = Morocco,a member of the Saadi Dynasty "Hussein al-Araj"
"al-Lubnani" =the lebanese
"al-Mughrabi" = the Moroccan ("Maghreb" " meaning "West" in Arabic, and usually referring to North Africa or specifically to Morocco) ,"Dalal Mughrabi"
"al-Djazair"=the Algerian
"al-Qurashi"=saudi arabia "clan of Quraish"
"al-azd" =yemen "Azd tribe"
"al-Yamani"= the Yemeni "Issam Al Yamani"
"al-Afghani" = the Afghan
"Al-Sidawi" = from "Sidon" lebanon
"Al-fayyumi" = from "Faiyum" egypt
"al-Hijazi" or "Hijazi" = present-day saudi arabia "Ahlam Higazi, a "Palestinian" artist from Hebron"
"al-Hindi" =the Indian "Amin al-Hindi"
"al-Tamimi" or "Tamimi" = from the tribe or clan of Banu-Tamim "Azzam Tamimi"
"Hamati" = from syria ( HAMA city)
"Omayya" = from saudi arabia "Banu Omayya tribe" "Omayya Joha" "palestinian artist" "
"Othman" = turkey
"murad" =yemen "murad tribe"
"Alawi" = from syria (minority religious group in syria)
"Iraqi"A279; =from Iraq.
"halabi" =from aleppo syria
"Dajani"= from saudi arabia
"Mattar" = from YEMEN (the village of BANI Mattar)
"al-baghdadi"= from bagdad iraq.
"Tarabulsi"= A279;A279;Tarabulus-Tripoli, Lebanon.
"Hourani" =Houran Syria.
"Zubeidi"= from iraq "Zubeidi tribe" "Zakaria Zubeidi"
"al-Husayni" =saudi arabia.
"Saudi" =Saudi Arabia.
"Metzarwah"=egypt.
"Barda"""""""""""wil" ="salah bardawil" HAMAS legislator in gaza,egypt "bardawil lake" area
"nashashibi"= syria.
"Bushnak" =bosnia
"zoabi"= from iraq "Haneen Zoabi".
"Turki" =turkey "Daud Turki"
"al-Kurd" = kurdistan.
"Haddadins" = YEMEN descended from Ghassanid Christian Arabs.
"Arab Abu-Kishk" = Egypt.(Bedouins)
"Arab al shakirat" = Egypt (Bedouins)
"Arab al zabidat" = Egypt (Bedouins)
"Arab al aramsha" = Egypt (Bedouins)
"Abu Sitta" =In Arabic' Abu means father and sitta means six. Translated it actually means father of six. The Abu Sitta family primarily received this name because around the year 1700, a well known knight of the large Al-Tarabeen tribe always had six slaves (i.e. fedawyah, bodyguards), 3 on each side, with him. They were with him wherever he went, day or night. Hence the name "ABU SITTA." =Egypt (Bedouins) "Salman Abu Sitta "
"Nuba, Hebron" =founded by the "nuba people"
Even "Arafat",A279; the most famous fakestinian and leader of the terrorist grup the A279; P.L.O,A279; is not native to judea. HeA279; called himselfA279; a "Palestinian refugee" and claimed he was born in jerusalem ! BUT spoke
Arabic with Egyptian dialect. He was born in 1929 Cairo, Egypt. He served in the Egyptian army,A279;A279; studied in the University of Cairo, and livedA279; inA279; Cairo until 1956 !
Arafat's full name wasA279; Mohammed Abdel Rahman Abdel RaoufA279; Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini.
"Al-Qudwa"tribe origin?
-Professor Azmi Bishara(Arabic: عزمي بشارة)-- a "palestinian arab"

"There is no "palestinian nation" !
when were there any Palestinians??? LOL
until the end of the 19th century, Palestine was the south of "Greater Syria" another resent invention.
there isA279; only an arab nation !
the word "palestine" its self is a colonial invention used byA279; the romans in order to eraseA279; the jewish identity of judea and israel.
even the "Palestinian National Charter" recognizes all the jews living in the region prior to the 1948 war as "palestinians" !
its an intellectual fad, divorced from the concerns of uneducated people"

-Zuheir Mohsen (Arabic: زهير محسن)- top p.l.o member responsible for damur massacre.

"The "Palestinian people" does not exist. The creationA279; of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a "Palestinian people".."
-Walid Shoebat (Arabic: وليد شويباتR06;)-

"As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village "Beit Sahur " in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families..."

Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security "Fathi Hammad" admits on live T.V ! :
"Half of the Palestinians Are Egyptians decent and the Other Half Are Saudis"
click to watch on al-jazira
for more information please google "Old Yishuv".
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2013 9:36:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
That was copied and pasted, just figured it was worth posting, as it refutes a lot of the poorly constructed pro-Palestinian arguments by proving that Palestinians essentially don't even truly exist.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2013 9:38:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If anyone still wants to argue for 'Palestine', I am willing, but read the post before going on your inane rants about 'apartheid' and your revisionist holocaust denial.
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2013 10:19:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/30/2013 9:38:26 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
If anyone still wants to argue for 'Palestine', I am willing, but read the post before going on your inane rants about 'apartheid' and your revisionist holocaust denial.

What, people who live in the area called Palestine don't count as Palestinians?
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/30/2013 10:21:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/30/2013 10:19:45 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/30/2013 9:38:26 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
If anyone still wants to argue for 'Palestine', I am willing, but read the post before going on your inane rants about 'apartheid' and your revisionist holocaust denial.

What, people who live in the area called Palestine don't count as Palestinians?

Obviously didn't read the OP.

Palestine doesn't even exist, the name was changed from Israel to Palestine to further the Roman's agenda of demonizing the Jews.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 1:35:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/30/2013 10:21:09 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/30/2013 10:19:45 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/30/2013 9:38:26 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
If anyone still wants to argue for 'Palestine', I am willing, but read the post before going on your inane rants about 'apartheid' and your revisionist holocaust denial.

What, people who live in the area called Palestine don't count as Palestinians?

Obviously didn't read the OP.

Palestine doesn't even exist, the name was changed from Israel to Palestine to further the Roman's agenda of demonizing the Jews.

Those Romans mess everything up.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 10:59:36 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/30/2013 10:21:09 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/30/2013 10:19:45 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/30/2013 9:38:26 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
If anyone still wants to argue for 'Palestine', I am willing, but read the post before going on your inane rants about 'apartheid' and your revisionist holocaust denial.

What, people who live in the area called Palestine don't count as Palestinians?

Obviously didn't read the OP.

Palestine doesn't even exist, the name was changed from Israel to Palestine to further the Roman's agenda of demonizing the Jews.

Actually the name originated with the ancient Greeks... The Histories first mentioned it.
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

In fact the name of the land/country is completely meaningless and just the fact that people want to label it means they have predispositions and beliefs that they want reinforced by the name they choose.

Call it Israel, Palestine, or a pile of dog dung, it does not change the fact that there is a history of violence and a struggle for power between two and more groups of people in a limited geographical area.

Heck, even Israel does not want to bring the West Bank and Gaza into Israel proper, because that would mean they have to give voting rights to a population of Muslims that out number the population of Israel proper.

There are too many ponies in this race to solve it, which is unfortunate. Giving names and historical claims to the land and peoples just continues to divert people from real solutions, which is also unfortunate.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:40:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The OP is literally a mess of gobbledygook. Like, literally. I can't even read it.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.

In fact the name of the land/country is completely meaningless and just the fact that people want to label it means they have predispositions and beliefs that they want reinforced by the name they choose.

It's not meaningless at all, your point here is moot when looking at the debate from a historical perspective.

I could argue for Israel from nearly any perspective as they are on balance more humanitarian, civilized, democratic, and peaceful then Gaza strip/Iran/Egypt/Lebanon.

Call it Israel, Palestine, or a pile of dog dung, it does not change the fact that there is a history of violence and a struggle for power between two and more groups of people in a limited geographical area.

You're right, there's a huge populous of Islamic extremists who want to fight a holy war against the Jewish people under the guise of freeing the 'Palestinians' (even though Palestinians simply don't exist).

Heck, even Israel does not want to bring the West Bank and Gaza into Israel proper, because that would mean they have to give voting rights to a population of Muslims that out number the population of Israel proper.

That's a good point, but although I am a Libertarian, I heavily believe in the idea that we shouldn't give rights to people who would take away those same rights if they were in power, so your point is moot, at least in my opinion.

There are too many ponies in this race to solve it, which is unfortunate. Giving names and historical claims to the land and peoples just continues to divert people from real solutions, which is also unfortunate.

There are multiple aspects to debate about this on, one of them is from a historical aspect, once again, I'd be glad to debate you on nearly any aspect of the issue.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:55:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 11:40:07 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
The OP is literally a mess of gobbledygook. Like, literally. I can't even read it.

It is a copy-paste, sorry.

The last 2-3 paragraphs are more legible and put the above evidence in to perspective.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:57:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/30/2013 9:36:48 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
That was copied and pasted, just figured it was worth posting, as it refutes a lot of the poorly constructed pro-Palestinian arguments by proving that Palestinians essentially don't even truly exist.

Where is the source? Allot of the characters were screwed up. I skimmed over the bit about surnames, as it was completely irrelevant.

One good point it does make, a point which I have made before, is that Palestine is a fairy recent invention. The British Mandate for Palestine was intended to create a Jewish National Home, prior to the British Mandate Palestine was a part of Ottoman Syria, which was a territory of the Ottoman Empire. After WWI the Ottoman Empire was broken up, and the Syria became a territory of the British.

When the Arabs threw a hissy fit about turning Syria into a Jewish National Home, the British split the territory in 2, creating Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan was much larger than Palestine, and yet the Arabs were still not satisfied. The UN decided to split Palestine in 2 again, the Jews agreed but the Arabs rejected the proposal. The Arabs, who now call themselves Palestinians, would not settle for anything less than the whole pie.

To this day, Palestinians still won't settle for anything less. When the Palestinians declared their independence they declared that all of Israel was Palestine not just the Palestinian National Authority, which was actually created by Israel in order to promote peace.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:58:37 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 11:57:33 AM, DanT wrote:
At 7/30/2013 9:36:48 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
That was copied and pasted, just figured it was worth posting, as it refutes a lot of the poorly constructed pro-Palestinian arguments by proving that Palestinians essentially don't even truly exist.

Where is the source? Allot of the characters were screwed up. I skimmed over the bit about surnames, as it was completely irrelevant.

One good point it does make, a point which I have made before, is that Palestine is a fairy recent invention. The British Mandate for Palestine was intended to create a Jewish National Home, prior to the British Mandate Palestine was a part of Ottoman Syria, which was a territory of the Ottoman Empire. After WWI the Ottoman Empire was broken up, and the Syria became a territory of the British.

When the Arabs threw a hissy fit about turning Syria into a Jewish National Home, the British split the territory in 2, creating Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan was much larger than Palestine, and yet the Arabs were still not satisfied. The UN decided to split Palestine in 2 again, the Jews agreed but the Arabs rejected the proposal. The Arabs, who now call themselves Palestinians, would not settle for anything less than the whole pie.

To this day, Palestinians still won't settle for anything less. When the Palestinians declared their independence they declared that all of Israel was Palestine not just the Palestinian National Authority, which was actually created by Israel in order to promote peace.

A similar thing happened with India and Pakistan.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 12:05:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 11:57:33 AM, DanT wrote:
At 7/30/2013 9:36:48 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
That was copied and pasted, just figured it was worth posting, as it refutes a lot of the poorly constructed pro-Palestinian arguments by proving that Palestinians essentially don't even truly exist.

Where is the source? Allot of the characters were screwed up. I skimmed over the bit about surnames, as it was completely irrelevant.

I will have to find the sources and copy/paste them, most of them are .org, wiki, etc.

People talk trash about wiki because of the bad spiel it got by academia, but it's more reputable than even most .org sources in my opinion.


One good point it does make, a point which I have made before, is that Palestine is a fairy recent invention. The British Mandate for Palestine was intended to create a Jewish National Home, prior to the British Mandate Palestine was a part of Ottoman Syria, which was a territory of the Ottoman Empire. After WWI the Ottoman Empire was broken up, and the Syria became a territory of the British.

When the Arabs threw a hissy fit about turning Syria into a Jewish National Home, the British split the territory in 2, creating Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan was much larger than Palestine, and yet the Arabs were still not satisfied. The UN decided to split Palestine in 2 again, the Jews agreed but the Arabs rejected the proposal. The Arabs, who now call themselves Palestinians, would not settle for anything less than the whole pie.

To this day, Palestinians still won't settle for anything less. When the Palestinians declared their independence they declared that all of Israel was Palestine not just the Palestinian National Authority, which was actually created by Israel in order to promote peace

Agreed.

To be honest, most anti-Israel arguments come from people who are either poorly informed about history or are just plainly antisemitic, although that doesn't speak for all people who argue against Israel, but it does for most of them.

One argument I tend to laugh at is the Israel-apartheid argument, if Israel was committing apartheid they wouldn't let hundreds upon thousands of 'Palestinians' in to their territory, but then again most people don't understand the true definition of apartheid and try to use the South African example of it and compare it to Israel, South Africa was using a very extreme form of apartheid.
http://en.wikipedia.org...(Israel)
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 5:19:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 12:05:57 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:57:33 AM, DanT wrote:
At 7/30/2013 9:36:48 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
That was copied and pasted, just figured it was worth posting, as it refutes a lot of the poorly constructed pro-Palestinian arguments by proving that Palestinians essentially don't even truly exist.

Where is the source? Allot of the characters were screwed up. I skimmed over the bit about surnames, as it was completely irrelevant.

I will have to find the sources and copy/paste them, most of them are .org, wiki, etc.

People talk trash about wiki because of the bad spiel it got by academia, but it's more reputable than even most .org sources in my opinion.

A source can be relatively reliable and still not be reliable. Just because most .org sources are less reliable than wiki, does not make wiki reliable.

One good point it does make, a point which I have made before, is that Palestine is a fairy recent invention. The British Mandate for Palestine was intended to create a Jewish National Home, prior to the British Mandate Palestine was a part of Ottoman Syria, which was a territory of the Ottoman Empire. After WWI the Ottoman Empire was broken up, and the Syria became a territory of the British.

When the Arabs threw a hissy fit about turning Syria into a Jewish National Home, the British split the territory in 2, creating Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan was much larger than Palestine, and yet the Arabs were still not satisfied. The UN decided to split Palestine in 2 again, the Jews agreed but the Arabs rejected the proposal. The Arabs, who now call themselves Palestinians, would not settle for anything less than the whole pie.

To this day, Palestinians still won't settle for anything less. When the Palestinians declared their independence they declared that all of Israel was Palestine not just the Palestinian National Authority, which was actually created by Israel in order to promote peace

Agreed.

To be honest, most anti-Israel arguments come from people who are either poorly informed about history or are just plainly antisemitic, although that doesn't speak for all people who argue against Israel, but it does for most of them.

There are also those with confirmation bias. Such as Muslims, or Left wingers.
One argument I tend to laugh at is the Israel-apartheid argument, if Israel was committing apartheid they wouldn't let hundreds upon thousands of 'Palestinians' in to their territory, but then again most people don't understand the true definition of apartheid and try to use the South African example of it and compare it to Israel, South Africa was using a very extreme form of apartheid.
http://en.wikipedia.org...(Israel)

Everything Israel has done that the anti-Israeli camp freaks out about, was done to protect Israel's national security (Muslims and Jews alike). Most if not all of the "atrocities" people claim Israel has committed, were policies forced upon Israel by Palestinian terrorists.

For example, when the Palestinian terrorists used human shields as they fired rockets into Israel. Israel returned fire, and people jumped on their case for firing into populated areas. What else are they suppose to do? They gave warnings before hand, which in my opinion they shouldn't have to do. If you see a group of terrorists preparing to fire rockets, it is your own damn fault if you get blown up for sticking around.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 5:58:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.

Also, we did kind of steal it from the Canaanites. If that makes it ours, why isn't it the property of whoever stole it last?
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 7:13:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 5:58:13 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.

Also, we did kind of steal it from the Canaanites. If that makes it ours, why isn't it the property of whoever stole it last?

The land belongs to the people, and the government is legitimized by the people. The government is representatives of the entire community. The majority has a right to alter or abolish the government. The minority has a right to secede or to renounce citizenship. 75.3% of Israel is Jewish, while only 20.7% is Arab.

The original inhabitants were Canaanites, who the Hebrew people were descendant from. The Canaanites were later called Phoenicians, although they still referred to themselves as Canaanites.

When the Hebrews conquered Israel, they wiped out the original inhabitants of the conquered lands, thereby legitimizing their rule. The conquest of Canaan was tantamount to a civil war, because they were essentially the same people.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 7:38:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:13:44 PM, DanT wrote:
At 7/31/2013 5:58:13 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.

Also, we did kind of steal it from the Canaanites. If that makes it ours, why isn't it the property of whoever stole it last?

The land belongs to the people, and the government is legitimized by the people. The government is representatives of the entire community. The majority has a right to alter or abolish the government. The minority has a right to secede or to renounce citizenship. 75.3% of Israel is Jewish, while only 20.7% is Arab.

The original inhabitants were Canaanites, who the Hebrew people were descendant from. The Canaanites were later called Phoenicians, although they still referred to themselves as Canaanites.

When the Hebrews conquered Israel, they wiped out the original inhabitants of the conquered lands, thereby legitimizing their rule. The conquest of Canaan was tantamount to a civil war, because they were essentially the same people.

And civil war was bad. Really, if the rule is that whoever last settled it when it was abandoned gets it, we don't know who owns it.
1Devilsadvocate
Posts: 1,518
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 8:54:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:

Heck, even Israel does not want to bring the West Bank and Gaza into Israel proper, because that would mean they have to give voting rights to a population of Muslims that out number the population of Israel proper.

I'm not sure what the point here is, but some of the details aren't 100% accurate.
First of all, the Muslim population does not come close to outnumbering the population of Israel proper. Also, Gaza was part of Israel until 1993/2005 at which point the Israeli government evicted & expelled its own people from Gaza to give it over to the Palestinians in the hope of peace. As we can see, that didn't really happen and in fact Gaza became a new launching pad for rockets and terrorizm. This obviously increased & deepened Israeli distrust of the palestinians.
However, the main idea that Israel is not really asking for Gaza & the west bank, is trrue.
I cannot write in English, because of the treacherous spelling. When I am reading, I only hear it and am unable to remember what the written word looks like."
"Albert Einstein

http://www.twainquotes.com... , http://thewritecorner.wordpress.com... , http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com...
1Devilsadvocate
Posts: 1,518
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 9:02:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the Palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

Not by any single nation. But why is that relevant, if someone owns a property for one year, and then it's stolen for 2 years, does he lose ownership?
All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.

It's actually been supported by archeology & other historical documents such as Josephus.
I cannot write in English, because of the treacherous spelling. When I am reading, I only hear it and am unable to remember what the written word looks like."
"Albert Einstein

http://www.twainquotes.com... , http://thewritecorner.wordpress.com... , http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com...
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 9:08:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 5:58:13 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.

Also, we did kind of steal it from the Canaanites. If that makes it ours, why isn't it the property of whoever stole it last?

It is the property of who ever stole it last. Who ever that is then uses that right to keep "the man" down so they don't loose it.

That is also why when one looks at it who has no skin in the game realizes that anyone who is trying to steal it is merely doing what countless others have done in history, the Jews, the Assyrians, Babylonians, Alexander the Great, the Romans, the Turks, the Christians, etc.

There can be no historical claim on the land. There is only today's power struggle for the land. There is only war for the land. Argument for friendly civilized war is unrealistic and short sighted.

How can anyone pick any side in this war and justify one is more right than the other unless one has a biased interest in one side winning over the other?
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 9:16:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:38:32 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/31/2013 7:13:44 PM, DanT wrote:
At 7/31/2013 5:58:13 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
At 7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.

Also, we did kind of steal it from the Canaanites. If that makes it ours, why isn't it the property of whoever stole it last?

The land belongs to the people, and the government is legitimized by the people. The government is representatives of the entire community. The majority has a right to alter or abolish the government. The minority has a right to secede or to renounce citizenship. 75.3% of Israel is Jewish, while only 20.7% is Arab.

The original inhabitants were Canaanites, who the Hebrew people were descendant from. The Canaanites were later called Phoenicians, although they still referred to themselves as Canaanites.

When the Hebrews conquered Israel, they wiped out the original inhabitants of the conquered lands, thereby legitimizing their rule. The conquest of Canaan was tantamount to a civil war, because they were essentially the same people.

And civil war was bad. Really, if the rule is that whoever last settled it when it was abandoned gets it, we don't know who owns it.

The rule is the population decides.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 9:24:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 8:54:53 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:


Heck, even Israel does not want to bring the West Bank and Gaza into Israel proper, because that would mean they have to give voting rights to a population of Muslims that out number the population of Israel proper.

I'm not sure what the point here is, but some of the details aren't 100% accurate.
First of all, the Muslim population does not come close to outnumbering the population of Israel proper. Also, Gaza was part of Israel until 1993/2005 at which point the Israeli government evicted & expelled its own people from Gaza to give it over to the Palestinians in the hope of peace. As we can see, that didn't really happen and in fact Gaza became a new launching pad for rockets and terrorizm. This obviously increased & deepened Israeli distrust of the palestinians.
However, the main idea that Israel is not really asking for Gaza & the west bank, is trrue.

https://www.cia.gov...
Population Israel
7.7 million - 76% Jewish & 17% Muslim

Population West Bank
2.7 million - 75% Muslim & 17% Jewish

https://www.cia.gov...
Population Gaza
1.7 million - 99% Muslim

You are right there would not be a majority of Muslim if the West Bank and Gaza were to join Israel proper, but is it enough people that should they be incorporated into Israel and given voting rights it would raise havoc.

If you believe that the unilateral plan to disengage from Gaza was for peace then you have been clearly indoctrinated with a pro Israeli bias.
1Devilsadvocate
Posts: 1,518
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 9:26:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 9:24:33 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 8:54:53 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:


Heck, even Israel does not want to bring the West Bank and Gaza into Israel proper, because that would mean they have to give voting rights to a population of Muslims that out number the population of Israel proper.

I'm not sure what the point here is, but some of the details aren't 100% accurate.
First of all, the Muslim population does not come close to outnumbering the population of Israel proper. Also, Gaza was part of Israel until 1993/2005 at which point the Israeli government evicted & expelled its own people from Gaza to give it over to the Palestinians in the hope of peace. As we can see, that didn't really happen and in fact Gaza became a new launching pad for rockets and terrorizm. This obviously increased & deepened Israeli distrust of the palestinians.
However, the main idea that Israel is not really asking for Gaza & the west bank, is trrue.

https://www.cia.gov...
Population Israel
7.7 million - 76% Jewish & 17% Muslim

Population West Bank
2.7 million - 75% Muslim & 17% Jewish

https://www.cia.gov...
Population Gaza
1.7 million - 99% Muslim

You are right there would not be a majority of Muslim if the West Bank and Gaza were to join Israel proper, but is it enough people that should they be incorporated into Israel and given voting rights it would raise havoc.

If you believe that the unilateral plan to disengage from Gaza was for peace then you have been clearly indoctrinated with a pro Israeli bias.

Then what do you think it was for?
I cannot write in English, because of the treacherous spelling. When I am reading, I only hear it and am unable to remember what the written word looks like."
"Albert Einstein

http://www.twainquotes.com... , http://thewritecorner.wordpress.com... , http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com...
1Devilsadvocate
Posts: 1,518
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 9:38:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 11:57:33 AM, DanT wrote:
At 7/30/2013 9:36:48 PM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
That was copied and pasted, just figured it was worth posting, as it refutes a lot of the poorly constructed pro-Palestinian arguments by proving that Palestinians essentially don't even truly exist.

Where is the source? Allot of the characters were screwed up. I skimmed over the bit about surnames, as it was completely irrelevant.


http://www.liveleak.com...
http://www.liveleak.com...
http://www.answering-islam.org...
http://www.imninalu.net...

One good point it does make, a point which I have made before, is that Palestine is a fairy recent invention. The British Mandate for Palestine was intended to create a Jewish National Home, prior to the British Mandate Palestine was a part of Ottoman Syria, which was a territory of the Ottoman Empire. After WWI the Ottoman Empire was broken up, and the Syria became a territory of the British.

When the Arabs threw a hissy fit about turning Syria into a Jewish National Home, the British split the territory in 2, creating Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan was much larger than Palestine, and yet the Arabs were still not satisfied. The UN decided to split Palestine in 2 again, the Jews agreed but the Arabs rejected the proposal. The Arabs, who now call themselves Palestinians, would not settle for anything less than the whole pie.

To this day, Palestinians still won't settle for anything less. When the Palestinians declared their independence they declared that all of Israel was Palestine not just the Palestinian National Authority, which was actually created by Israel in order to promote peace.
I cannot write in English, because of the treacherous spelling. When I am reading, I only hear it and am unable to remember what the written word looks like."
"Albert Einstein

http://www.twainquotes.com... , http://thewritecorner.wordpress.com... , http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com...
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 9:56:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 9:26:34 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
At 7/31/2013 9:24:33 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 8:54:53 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:


Heck, even Israel does not want to bring the West Bank and Gaza into Israel proper, because that would mean they have to give voting rights to a population of Muslims that out number the population of Israel proper.

I'm not sure what the point here is, but some of the details aren't 100% accurate.
First of all, the Muslim population does not come close to outnumbering the population of Israel proper. Also, Gaza was part of Israel until 1993/2005 at which point the Israeli government evicted & expelled its own people from Gaza to give it over to the Palestinians in the hope of peace. As we can see, that didn't really happen and in fact Gaza became a new launching pad for rockets and terrorizm. This obviously increased & deepened Israeli distrust of the palestinians.
However, the main idea that Israel is not really asking for Gaza & the west bank, is trrue.

https://www.cia.gov...
Population Israel
7.7 million - 76% Jewish & 17% Muslim

Population West Bank
2.7 million - 75% Muslim & 17% Jewish

https://www.cia.gov...
Population Gaza
1.7 million - 99% Muslim

You are right there would not be a majority of Muslim if the West Bank and Gaza were to join Israel proper, but is it enough people that should they be incorporated into Israel and given voting rights it would raise havoc.

If you believe that the unilateral plan to disengage from Gaza was for peace then you have been clearly indoctrinated with a pro Israeli bias.

Then what do you think it was for?

http://www.mfa.gov.il...

Straight from Ariel Sharon's mouth:

.................................
"These steps will increase security for the residents of Israel and relieve the pressure on the IDF and security forces in fulfilling the difficult tasks they are faced with."
...............................
"The Disengagement Plan will include the redeployment of IDF units along new security lines and a change in the deployment of settlements, which will reduce as much as possible the number of Israelis located in the heart of the Palestinian population."
..............................
"The relocation of settlements will be made, first and foremost, in order to draw the most efficient security line possible, thereby creating this disengagement between Israel and the Palestinians. This security line will not constitute the permanent border of the State of Israel."

................................

That is some high quality peacemanship from Sharon. His son who wrote a book about him said that he gave his father the idea to withdraw. It just got conveniently wrapped up all pretty in the "roadmap for peace".

If I recall right many Palestine did not want a unilateral withdraw because they did not feel they could manage the area. They had no security forces, no weapons, or anything to keep the peace. Not to mention Israel still controlled the boarder with Egypt, controlled the ports and airspace. They did it purely to get their soldiers out of harms way because they felt they could secure Israel proper just as effectively by being out of Gaza.
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 10:18:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 9:02:37 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
At 7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the Palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

Not by any single nation. But why is that relevant, if someone owns a property for one year, and then it's stolen for 2 years, does he lose ownership?
All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.


It's actually been supported by archeology & other historical documents such as Josephus.

Why are you arbitrarily picking the times that the Jews controlled the land as the "owners"? There were owners before, between, and after them.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:25:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 10:18:35 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 9:02:37 PM, 1Devilsadvocate wrote:
At 7/31/2013 3:55:34 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:55:05 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
At 7/31/2013 11:25:17 AM, slo1 wrote:
Putting arbitrary labels on the area of earth does absolutely nothing to anyone's argument.

I believe it does if you look at it from a historical aspect, a lot of times the Palestinian-israel debate is based on history, I am arguing my point from a historical perspective.


When you look at history, the complete history, one soon realizes that there has been a longer duration of non Jewish rule than there has been Jewish rule of the land in question.

Not by any single nation. But why is that relevant, if someone owns a property for one year, and then it's stolen for 2 years, does he lose ownership?
All claims of a right to Jewish rule of the land is based upon a book written by Jewish people, hardly a non-biased source.


It's actually been supported by archeology & other historical documents such as Josephus.

Why are you arbitrarily picking the times that the Jews controlled the land as the "owners"? There were owners before, between, and after them.

So if this is true then by your logic Israel is justified in defending and keeping Israel by the same means as it's predecessors, correct? Meaning genocide, 'apartheid' (not saying Israel does do these things, but if it did by your logic it would be justified), historical revisionism/propaganda, etc.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:29:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Also, you can argue that Israel should have the land by it's record as being more:

-Democratic
-Humanitarian
- Fiscally responsible
- Peaceful
etc

So if you uphold the views of democracy (or just renounce authoritarianism and totalitarianism), humanitarianism, fiscal responsibility, and peace, then you could support Israel in the sense that it does a better job of advancing said views.