Israel doesn't need the world's approval to defend itself..

Nakedeye66

Ok folks, if you feel I've left you high and dry, PM me.

Otherwise, I'll go back to debating the virtues of Pearl Jam shows. Last time I checked we share the common thread of being PJ fans ... and not those of a particular political party or NGO.

Nakedeye66

mammasan wrote:

Yes I saw that after I posted. Then why even make the comment. Why label people such a horrible thing as a Jew hater if you don't even believe it yourself.

Like many of you I get swept up in the heat of discussing a hot topic (and why I tend to steer clear of the politics). Labels are wrong, and I have no idea as to the depth of your individual beliefs. But I do respect individuals.

I admire Israel, and wish all Israelis and Arabs could live in peace and prosperity. Above all, I wish all Americans could live in peace and prosperity. I don't like oversimplifications, but this topic all too often leads to them. Also, I don't like doing this by email or messaging. I prefer my political debates face-to-face, preferably with a beer. A bunch of folks sitting behind keyboards leaves little room for humor or a less antagonistic approach.

There are good reasons I've been following the band 15 years and a long time 10c member, yet have so few posts. I don't really like the medium, and the tone usually comes off wrong.

I assume there isn't a lot of love for Israel, and come out swinging. Obviously, I agitated a bit ... and admittedly meant to. No harm, no foul.

You can decide for yourselves whether you'll trust my version of PJ "history" if you want to know what boots to buy. I have every one theyve released since 2000 (and some old ones but admittedly spoiled by the higher quality lately).

For those of you trying to cool the tempature here, thanks. For those who like it hot, I'm fine with that too.

I think we all want peace on earth. I'm a guy raising a family. My free time is limited ... and I'd rather spend it listening to PJ shows than arguing about the Middle East. I've made my cameo here.

Keep your passions burning. You should.

gimmesometruth27

i read through this whole thread and i am extremely disapointed.

i keep waiting to see fando show up and offer some of his/her wonderful insights but it hasn't happened yet. he just starts these random threads and watches them go.

reminds me of one barroom hero.....rip...

even flow?

Nakedeye66 wrote:

Even Flow, it seems you are from the "history didn't begin until 1967" camp, so a little lesson may be in order from one who was actually alive at that time.

First, the Israel=Nazis analogy would be laughable if it weren't so sad (and bigoted). The REAL Nazis (circa 1933-1945) actually had REAL allies in the Middle East. The grand mufti of Jerusalem was formally allied with Hitler, and they shared a common goal - to rid the earth of Jews. That Grand Mufti is what they today call "Palestinian", but that term wasn't invented until 1967. And the reason that they could share the goal of ridding the Middle East of Jews was that (gasp!), there actually were Jews in that part of the world long before the modern State of Israel in 1948. Of course that isn't PC to say to folks who believe the Jews "took Palestinian land". After the armistice in 1949, Jews who lived all over the Arab world were murdered or driven from their homes to the one place of relative safety - Israel ... and yes, that included the many Jews living in the "territories", who were driven (or killed) from the West Bank that came under Jordanian control, and Gaza which came under Egyptian control. But nobody ever speaks of Jewish refugees because to those of you who think you are so "progressive", it is perfectly acceptable for 27 Arab nations to have "cleansed" themselves of Jews, while you conveniently ignore that Israel is 20% Arab, and they actually srve in the parliament. From 1949-1967, the only "occupation" was by Jordan and Egypt. But curiously Jordan and Egypt refused to grant citizenship to the indiginous Arab population. Why? Because then they would have been assimilated Jordanian or Egyptian citizens ... God forbid that should have happened because then the propaganda anvil of 5th generation "refugees" couldn't be held over the head of Israel. You know, the "oppressor", the "Nazis". Just like the real Nazis, the real Arabs shared a goal of Judenrein land ... and accomplished it! And yet you gullibly buy into the myth of the Israeli "Goliath" when Israel is the size of a pubic hair on a bedsheet when compared to the 27 nation Arab Middle East. Do you shed a tear for the Jews who were killed or driven from those lands??

So the real Nazis had real allies in the Middle East, and the Grand (Palestinian) Mufti topped the list. What else did the real Nazis do in the Middle East. Well, the real Nazis sent down envoys of sorts into Syria and Iraq. And, in conjunction with the locals, the Nazis created local Nazi parties under the Baath name. Thats right, the Baathists of Saddam and Assad were a Nazi joint venture.

So for all your IDF=Nazi bluster, you might be compelled to look at who was allied with the ACTUAL Nazis, and the "Judenrein" philosophy they both believed and executed jointly.

So let's look at 1967 when the alleged "occupation" began. Funny thing is, Arafat's PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) was formed in 1964. Odd that they supposedly sought to liberate only "occupied territories" as we know them today BEFORE those territories were actually "occupied". Just what do you think the "victmized" Palestinians were looking to "liberate". Pretty simple actually, since the goal has remained unchanged since the 19th century - no Jews from the river (Jordan) to the sea (Mediterranean). Sounds like a rather authentic Nazi philsophy to me. But I forgot, in a world where history begins in '67 and is propagandized, the Jews are the "new Nazis". Forgive me for understanding a little actual history.

And your beloved UN, the bastion of all peace loving and tolerant people. Or shall we say "apartheid UN". Funny how Israel is accused of apartheid (i.e former South Africa), but the "tolerant" UN has rules which prohibit only one country from sitting on committees - Israel, of course. One set of rules for all the nations of the world ... another for Israel. Sounds like REAL apartheid to me, and not the baseless slur against tiny Israel.

And for this theory that Israel was somehow implanted amongst long-established Arab nations. Get real?

The Middle East as we know it today is largely a creation of the British and French divvying up their spoils of war when the Ottoman Empire fell in WWI. For about 600 years, the Middle East was ruled by the Turks. With the exception of Egypt and Persia (Iran), NONE of these nations existed prior to WWI, and many came about in the 1950s (AFTER Israel). They are all British and French creations. Unnatural nations created by the REAL colonialists. A colonial power has a home nation and yet seeks to expand over the globe to other nations. Zionism is the belief that the Jews, LIKE EVERY OTHER PEOPLE on the globe, should simply have a home. A far cry from true colonialism.

... which raises the next question, what is "Palestine" and why aren't the people there entitled to the same thing? Fair enough. When the Ottomans fell, the Brits took control over a portion of land known as the Palestine Mandate. The name "Palestine" came from the second century Romans after sacking biblical Israel and scattering the Jews. It was controlled by various entities over the next two millenia, but at know time by those who now call themselves "Palestinian". So after WWI, the British Mandate of Palestine encompassed all of what is now Israel, Gaza, West Bank, AND JORDAN. Around 1919, they decided to partition it into an Arab state ... and a Jewish state, divided at the Jordan River. East of the Jordan, a Palestinian state was created and given to the control of the Hashemite monarchy (the Husseins that have ruled, and do rule Jordan). To the west of the Jordan River (hence the name "West Bank"), it was to be a Jewish state. The Jewish state was proposed to encompass all of Israel and the "territories".

Jordan ... is close to 70% PALESTINIAN.

Well, Europe became decidedly more anti-Jewish as the 1920s and 1930s moved along. By the end of WWII, the UN proposed to partition the Jewish side a SECOND TIME. The Arabs rejected it, and Egypt, Iraq, Syria, and Jordan all attacked. When an armistice was reached in '49, Jordan took control of the West Bank and Egypt took Gaza, dutifully making sure the Arabs there remained "refugees".

I'm sure this is way too literate and confusing for you. After all it's so much easier to goosestep along with the anti-Israel left and shout slogans like Israel=Nazis. So I hate to trouble you with historical detail. After all, your leaders don't want you to think independently. They just want you to repeat their slogans and spew their venom.

But at a minimum, call it what it is. The disingenuous comparison of Israel to Nazis is a really weak cover for your unbashed Jew-hatred. so come out and be proud of your TRUE Nazi philosophy, which is shared by the Aryan Nations, Fatah, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian mullahs, Al Qaeda, the UN, Chomsky, Zinn, and the erudite folks at LeMonde and who sip cocktails at the American Colony hotel in Jerusalem lamenting those "Israeli brutes". Be proud of your intolerance and Judenrein values ... don't project it upon a people who merely seek to defend their home which is smaller than New Jersey (and, frankly, a home NOBODY WANTED until Jews came there in large numbers. For centuries it was amongst the most neglected and barren land on the planet).

Be proud of your bigotry Evenflow?. You are free to hate who you like ... but don't pretend you are "tolerant" and just out to sympathize with those who cry "victim". That charade is up.

We all want peace. Sure would be nice. But if you really think Israelis should talk talk talk and get empty promises from those hell-bent on their death and destruction, then your true colors do show.

Thanks for the update. But as you and everybody else on board who have our own opinions, we won't see eye to eye. Like the person who told you how you are just seeing things from history the way you want and convieniently leaving out or omiting things that don't gel with your ideology of the world. Which suprises nobody as we all do. I will see the world and interpret history and the world's religious books as I see fit. Just as you seem to think history can't change and you will be forever the victim. I say if you don't want to change, F-U. Not my fault.

The F-U is not only for you but every other person who takes history and their religious book and teachings into the 21st century and at face value.

Don't you get sick of playing the victim? And then using that to justify trying to tell me what I am. It sure gets tiring from this side to hear all the time. Just as bad as the Arabs who are now crying. You admit that you do have some Arab in you which is more then anybody else from your vantage point admits. You may just be a tad bigger then them in the scheme of things.

One more thing. Can you people really be perennial losers all through time? And if so.....Why don't you take it up with your god. If I have to hear or read about it, of course I will have an opinion.

Let me know when my race, or myself, which you know nothing of has persecuted you. I will be all ears and eyes.


And I do find it sad that when anybody else is "proud" of their "race" and has an opinion that dosen't gel with yours that people like you are the first to jump all over it. But your ideas seem to be the right ones all the time. At least you didn't stoop to the old anti-s retort. Gets real pathetic when it resorts to that because I don't see the world through your eyes. But just another perfect day in a perfect world with perfect people.

catefrances

Byrnzie wrote:

UN chief Kofi Annan and UK PM Tony Blair have called for an international force to be sent to Lebanon.

The force could "stop the bombardment coming over into Israel and therefore gives Israel a reason to stop its attacks on Hezbollah", Mr Blair said.

this is my favourite part. excuse me mr. blair, but how about telling the israelis to stop their attack so that negotiators can be sent in to discuss the release of the israeli soldiers?
give israel a reason to stop? give me a break tony.

thankyougrandma

Fando Y Lis love to watch Lebanese blood on Fox news... this idiot support the killing of innocent civilian...

danmac

Nakedeye66 wrote:

Even Flow, it seems you are from the "history didn't begin until 1967" camp, so a little lesson may be in order from one who was actually alive at that time.

First, the Israel=Nazis analogy would be laughable if it weren't so sad (and bigoted). The REAL Nazis (circa 1933-1945) actually had REAL allies in the Middle East. The grand mufti of Jerusalem was formally allied with Hitler, and they shared a common goal - to rid the earth of Jews. That Grand Mufti is what they today call "Palestinian", but that term wasn't invented until 1967. And the reason that they could share the goal of ridding the Middle East of Jews was that (gasp!), there actually were Jews in that part of the world long before the modern State of Israel in 1948. Of course that isn't PC to say to folks who believe the Jews "took Palestinian land". After the armistice in 1949, Jews who lived all over the Arab world were murdered or driven from their homes to the one place of relative safety - Israel ... and yes, that included the many Jews living in the "territories", who were driven (or killed) from the West Bank that came under Jordanian control, and Gaza which came under Egyptian control. But nobody ever speaks of Jewish refugees because to those of you who think you are so "progressive", it is perfectly acceptable for 27 Arab nations to have "cleansed" themselves of Jews, while you conveniently ignore that Israel is 20% Arab, and they actually srve in the parliament

blah blah etc etc

show.

For the record, everything that this poster alludes to with regards to Nazi involvement in the Middle East is 100 per cent lies and bullshit. Atypical Zionist scare mongering and rewriting of history. 1947 Baath was cocnstituted in Damascus. Hitler was nowhere, trust me.


You want the history of the Baath party? Look no furhter than MI6 and the OSS, the forerunner of the CIA. Who, in the battle against communism, were helped to power by the US and UK in 1963.

Hitler and Saddam, don't make me fucking laugh like that again!

farfromglorified

danmac wrote:

For the record, everything that this poster alludes to with regards to Nazi involvement in the Middle East is 100 per cent lies and bullshit. Atypical Zionist scare mongering and rewriting of history. 1947 Baath was cocnstituted in Damascus. Hitler was nowhere, trust me.

First, it's not 100% lies and bullshit. It is simply not quite complete. This is a good start regarding the poster's discussion of the Grand Mufti:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni

Second, the Nazi party was not instrumental in setting up the Baath party. However, they shared many of the same ends.

You want the history of the Baath party? Look no furhter than MI6 and the OSS, the forerunner of the CIA. Who, in the battle against communism, were helped to power by the US and UK in 1963.

That is silly. If you want the history of the foundation of the Baath party, you may find much of it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baath_Party

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salah_al-Din_al-Bitar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Aflaq

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaki_al-Arsuzi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_nationalism

Hitler and Saddam, don't make me fucking laugh like that again!

I don't think the poster mentioned a Hitler/Saddam cabal.

Bwalker545

danmac wrote:

For the record, everything that this poster alludes to with regards to Nazi involvement in the Middle East is 100 per cent lies and bullshit.
Hitler and Saddam, don't make me fucking laugh like that again!

http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=74647&browseCategoryId=&location=&parentcatid=&subcatid=

You should pick this DVD up...or hope it pops up on TV again...

Few people realize that the Baath party was actually formed upon the principles and organizational structure of the Nazi party. Iraq, because of its oil and hatred of Jews, was an important battleground between the Axis and Allied powers in World War II. Nazi propaganda was broadcast throughout Baghdad, and Iraqis often went on rampages against Jews throughout the war. One of the most ardent Nazi supporters during WWII was named Khairallah Talfah. Talfah was Saddam's uncle. After the war, many of the key Iraqi Nazi supporters, all of whom evaded prosecution, wound up involved in Saddam's rise to power. This special examines the key individuals of the Iraqi-Nazi connection, the little-known battle for Iraq in WWII, and the strange link to Saddam Hussein

But im sure the History channel (only decent TV left) is making all that up too...

Nakedeye66

Magus wrote:

http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=74647&browseCategoryId=&location=&parentcatid=&subcatid=
You should pick this DVD up...or hope it pops up on TV again...
But im sure the History channel (only decent TV left) is making all that up too...

Magus, nice to see there are a few voices of reason who have some concern for actual history as opposed to Chomskyite blather. Then again, some of these folks will just dismiss the History Channel as "Zionist Propaganda". It's so much easier that way.

Having said that, some of these posters are quite a bit more pleasant and articulate in 1-on-1 messaging, but I wouldn't want to destroy their "street credibility" amongst the lefty bigots by exposing them as willing to speak in a civilized manner to those who don't hate the US or Israel.

But keep up the good work. You provide some good balance and reason to the haters (who actually see themselves as "tolerant" and think they have free reign to be bigots since, in their alternate universe, there is no such thing as racism and bigotry from the political left since they are all "victims").

Bwalker545

It would be hard to call the history channel anyones propaganda...hell they have shows about corruption in the US government... The "Cresent and the Cross" Program offered one of the best mulit sided views on the Crusades I have EVER seen... I do my best to make it clear that I may not agree with what people are doing...or have done, but I UNDERSTAND why people do what they do, and think what they think. It amazes me that some people can wrap their minds around why others think the ways they do. It really isnt that hard. Everything flows backwards through time at a very understandable pace... Where we are headed in the future...not hard to figure out the likely options either... I challenge people who want to attack every aspect of history as "propaganda and lies!" to really look into the field, dont grab some left or right wing book that is going to distort this or that even to suit their agenda...their are plenty of very nuetral books on just about every subject. And if you really want to understand look WAY back into history and draw comparisons with societies that didnt even have these same problems...The Greeks(west) and Persians(east) were fighting long before christians and muslims got involved... why? Land, food, wealth...POWER.

Commy

Magus wrote:

It would be hard to call the history channel anyones propaganda...hell they have shows about corruption in the US government... The "Cresent and the Cross" Program offered one of the best mulit sided views on the Crusades I have EVER seen... I do my best to make it clear that I may not agree with what people are doing...or have done, but I UNDERSTAND why people do what they do, and think what they think. It amazes me that some people can wrap their minds around why others think the ways they do. It really isnt that hard. Everything flows backwards through time at a very understandable pace... Where we are headed in the future...not hard to figure out the likely options either... I challenge people who want to attack every aspect of history as "propaganda and lies!" to really look into the field, dont grab some left or right wing book that is going to distort this or that even to suit their agenda...their are plenty of very nuetral books on just about every subject. And if you really want to understand look WAY back into history and draw comparisons with societies that didnt even have these same problems...The Greeks(west) and Persians(east) were fighting long before christians and muslims got involved... why? Land, food, wealth...POWER.

Although it does present some intersting programs-like the one about swat teams and the atf and so on...they misinterpreted a hostage crisis-saying a sniper fired at a guy as a "diversion" when in reality he missed. The criminal then opened fire on the hostages, killing ten or so. They called it a victory for swat, as they pulled 30 hostages to safety. In reality they fucked up-could've negotiated and perhaps saved ten more lives.

And they said the ATF acted bravely and did the right thing in the Waco standoff-when everyone knows the ATF started shooting first, not to mention the fact that the FBI could have arrested David Koresch 2 days before the massacre when they had him alone in the woods. Dozens of women and children burned alive-actually cooked-they left that part out of the program as well.

A very pro authority slant. Very biased.

Bwalker545

Commy wrote:

Although it does present some intersting programs-like the one about swat teams and the atf and so on...they misinterpreted a hostage crisis-saying a sniper fired at a guy as a "diversion" when in reality he missed. The criminal then opened fire on the hostages, killing ten or so. They called it a victory for swat, as they pulled 30 hostages to safety. In reality they fucked up-could've negotiated and perhaps saved ten more lives.

Missed that one, perhaps true, but at the same time, most TV networks are not going to openly place the death of those 10 hostages on the sniper's head. Think about that for a moment. Also things like that on the THC...(love that abbreviation) are normally consistent with police records wheither or not those reports are accurate is another story...that and SWAT encounters are far from the norm for THC.

And they said the ATF acted bravely and did the right thing in the Waco standoff-when everyone knows the ATF started shooting first, not to mention the fact that the FBI could have arrested David Koresch 2 days before the massacre when they had him alone in the woods. Dozens of women and children burned alive-actually cooked-they left that part out of the program as well.

http://store.aetv.com/html/search/searc ... tid=163416

GUNS AND GODS is a revealing look at the infamous events at Waco and Ruby Ridge, from the factors that created the confrontations to the fallout from their violent resolutions. Hear from government officials about what went wrong, and examine the findings of the Congressional Inquiry on the cases. See extensive footage from both places, including the horrific climaxes. Some claim that these incidents are a clear example of government running amok, while others hold that the actions, while mismanaged, were not out of line. Both sides are presented here.

Sounds like a bias slant to me...

wolfamongwolves

fando y lis wrote:

Israel doesn't need the world's approval to defend itself

And unless you want to face up to charges of being either fatally inconsistent or simply prejudicial and elitist, I assume you accept that therefore neither should Palestine or Lebanon...

Bwalker545

That may be the topic name....but we hijacked this bitch a long time ago...

bluejourneyman

Israel not needing an excuse to defend itself…Please
Israel has battled since…forever. Biblical speaking they have taken whatever they wanted. I don’t condone the violence on either side (Israel or Lebanon). Furthermore Israel isn’t the victim here; all the dead are, regardless what side they are supposable on. Hell, the Jews even killed Jesus. And the term terrorist was invented by the Jews in 1948 when they bombed a hotel in Israel, trying to kill the English rule. As a recovering Republican, I see both sides, however I must side with the people who want peace. One more thing according to what you read (the bible or Koran), both sides say they are doing it in the name of God…Give me a break

Scratchin a Letter

Israel is comitting GENOCIDE.

For 2 soldiers? What about the innocent Palestinian prisoners? What about the INNOCENT people thay are killing? The INNOCENT people that are forced out of their homes and bombed?

What makes one life more valuable than another?

Bastards

Bwalker545

Genocide The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group

Unless you are calling Hezbollah a political group I beileve you are mistaken. And saying this is over strictly 2 kidnapped soldiers clearly shows your lack of understanding for the entire conflict. While the lives of those 2 soldiers are important it is about the recognition of borders and the violation of the border. The escalation of the conflict is the result of both sides agressive nature, and the understanding that neither side is exactly the most diplomatic group of people.

Milestone

fando y lis wrote:

I'm glad Israel is going to fight to the end to save its people.
It doesn't need to tolerate Hezbollah's or Iran's or ANYONE'S ***SHIT***!

Yeah! And they use our American built weapons!!! More money for us!!!!
(sarcastic)

Byrnzie

Nakedeye66 wrote:

Magus, nice to see there are a few voices of reason who have some concern for actual history as opposed to Chomskyite blather. Then again, some of these folks will just dismiss the History Channel as "Zionist Propaganda". It's so much easier that way.

Would you care to give an example of Chomskyite blather? Or is this just more flatulence?