So Bibi Wants To Begin The "Final Solution."

[angelo]

5000 muzzies in New Jersey may not have celebrated the twin towers coming down, but hundreds of thousands of muzzies in the Middle East did!

Yeah and millions of morons celebrated the murderous mob of Nazis in Charlotte.
Other than identifying with them, what's your point?

My point? You're talking Muslim apologist rubbish!

 

[angelo]

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14247/hamas-islamic-jihad-terrorist-organizations

This is what is and ever will be the reason why there will never be peace in the region.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You claim it's not reality but you don't present any adequate evidence of this.

I have, on numerous occasions.

If I post those articles about the Transfer Committee of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, or Ben Gurion's writings, or Dayan admitting that Palestinian villages were emptied and razed according plan, or the work of Jewish historians like Ilan Pappe and Benny Morris, or the history of ethnic cleansing in Ashkelon, will you read them this time?

The problem is you are showing what some people would have liked to do, you're not showing what happened.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Furthermore, if Israel were pushed to the wall they would use their bombs rather than die.

By 'die' you mean the refugees returning to their former homes. That's the mass murder and genocide tarted up as self-defense I was talking about, the exact same justification the Nazis used for the Final Solution.

They are one in the same. Allowing the refugees to return is sentencing the Jews to death.

 

[Arctish]

You claim it's not reality but you don't present any adequate evidence of this.

I have, on numerous occasions.

If I post those articles about the Transfer Committee of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, or Ben Gurion's writings, or Dayan admitting that Palestinian villages were emptied and razed according plan, or the work of Jewish historians like Ilan Pappe and Benny Morris, or the history of ethnic cleansing in Ashkelon, will you read them this time?

The problem is you are showing what some people would have liked to do, you're not showing what happened.

If you had read the links on any of the numerous occasions I provided them, you would not now be so ill-informed.

Here's one: Full text of "The Ethnic Cleansing Of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe

And here's a bit from the preface:

"I am for compulsory transfer; I do not see anything
immoral in it."

David Ben-Gurion to the Jewish Agency Executive,
June 1938

Let me know when you've at least skimmed it, and we can discuss Pappe's research and conclusions. Be advised, he's a highly regarded Israeli historian, so you usual excuses for not reading articles won't work.

After you read Pappe's work we can move on to Morris'. He's a Zionist as well as an Israeli historian, so your usual excuses will be even less effective.

 

[Arctish]

Furthermore, if Israel were pushed to the wall they would use their bombs rather than die.

By 'die' you mean the refugees returning to their former homes. That's the mass murder and genocide tarted up as self-defense I was talking about, the exact same justification the Nazis used for the Final Solution.

They are one in the same.

They are to you, yes. So your insistence that Netanyahu will murder millions and burn their corpses to ash rather than allow the 'undesirables' to return to the ethno-state he's creating is the same as saying he will implement the Final Solution.

Derec, are you paying attention?

Allowing the refugees to return is sentencing the Jews to death.

Hysterical bigoted racist fear mongering has never absolved anyone of the crime of plotting mass murder, much less carrying one out. And while damning people based on their ancestry might have been acceptable from Old Testament days to the heyday of the Third Reich, and might still be the norm among KKK members and neo-Nazis, modern Western societies of the kind you say Israel is have rejected that 'born guilty' mentality.

You can cry and scream about how much you hate and fear Palestinians but at the end of the day, if you advocate slaughtering them rather than allowing them to live in your community, you're the bad guy.

 

[angelo]

The problem is you are showing what some people would have liked to do, you're not showing what happened.

If you had read the links on any of the numerous occasions I provided them, you would not now be so ill-informed.

Here's one: Full text of "The Ethnic Cleansing Of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe

And here's a bit from the preface:

"I am for compulsory transfer; I do not see anything
immoral in it."

David Ben-Gurion to the Jewish Agency Executive,
June 1938

Let me know when you've at least skimmed it, and we can discuss Pappe's research and conclusions. Be advised, he's a highly regarded Israeli historian, so you usual excuses for not reading articles won't work.

After you read Pappe's work we can move on to Morris'. He's a Zionist as well as an Israeli historian, so your usual excuses will be even less effective.

Leftist palestinian apologist rubbish. A certain rabid leftist in same the calibre of a Noam Chomsky , John Pilger endorses this rubbish, which immediately discredits any credibility of Mr Ilan Pappe may have had.

 

[angelo]

Evidence of Palestinian terrorism and why there there will never be peace in that region of the planet. One cannot negotiate with barberics!

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14251/palestinians-hamas-traitors

 

[Arctish]

If you had read the links on any of the numerous occasions I provided them, you would not now be so ill-informed.

Here's one: Full text of "The Ethnic Cleansing Of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe

And here's a bit from the preface:



Let me know when you've at least skimmed it, and we can discuss Pappe's research and conclusions. Be advised, he's a highly regarded Israeli historian, so you usual excuses for not reading articles won't work.

After you read Pappe's work we can move on to Morris'. He's a Zionist as well as an Israeli historian, so your usual excuses will be even less effective.

Leftist palestinian apologist rubbish. A certain rabid leftist in same the calibre of a Noam Chomsky , John Pilger endorses this rubbish, which immediately discredits any credibility of Mr Ilan Pappe may have had.

^Textbook example of the Ad Hominem fallacy.

 

[angelo]

If you had read the links on any of the numerous occasions I provided them, you would not now be so ill-informed.

Here's one: Full text of "The Ethnic Cleansing Of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe

And here's a bit from the preface:



Let me know when you've at least skimmed it, and we can discuss Pappe's research and conclusions. Be advised, he's a highly regarded Israeli historian, so you usual excuses for not reading articles won't work.

After you read Pappe's work we can move on to Morris'. He's a Zionist as well as an Israeli historian, so your usual excuses will be even less effective.

Leftist palestinian apologist rubbish. A certain rabid leftist in same the calibre of a Noam Chomsky , John Pilger endorses this rubbish, which immediately discredits any credibility of Mr Ilan Pappe may have had.

^Textbook example of the Ad Hominem fallacy.

Behold the lunacy............................http://johnpilger.com/articles/the-war-on-venezuela-is-built-on-lies

 

[Arctish]

^Textbook example of the Ad Hominem fallacy.

Behold the lunacy............................http://johnpilger.com/articles/the-war-on-venezuela-is-built-on-lies

In what way is that article relevant to our discussion?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

They are one in the same.

They are to you, yes. So your insistence that Netanyahu will murder millions and burn their corpses to ash rather than allow the 'undesirables' to return to the ethno-state he's creating is the same as saying he will implement the Final Solution.

Derec, are you paying attention?

Allowing the refugees to return is sentencing the Jews to death.

Hysterical bigoted racist fear mongering has never absolved anyone of the crime of plotting mass murder, much less carrying one out. And while damning people based on their ancestry might have been acceptable from Old Testament days to the heyday of the Third Reich, and might still be the norm among KKK members and neo-Nazis, modern Western societies of the kind you say Israel is have rejected that 'born guilty' mentality.

You can cry and scream about how much you hate and fear Palestinians but at the end of the day, if you advocate slaughtering them rather than allowing them to live in your community, you're the bad guy.

The Palestinians have made their objective quite clear. If they're allowed to "return" (very few of them ever were there in the first place) they'll vote for a government that will do what they want to do. Genocide.

 

[Arctish]

They are to you, yes. So your insistence that Netanyahu will murder millions and burn their corpses to ash rather than allow the 'undesirables' to return to the ethno-state he's creating is the same as saying he will implement the Final Solution.

Derec, are you paying attention?



Hysterical bigoted racist fear mongering has never absolved anyone of the crime of plotting mass murder, much less carrying one out. And while damning people based on their ancestry might have been acceptable from Old Testament days to the heyday of the Third Reich, and might still be the norm among KKK members and neo-Nazis, modern Western societies of the kind you say Israel is have rejected that 'born guilty' mentality.

You can cry and scream about how much you hate and fear Palestinians but at the end of the day, if you advocate slaughtering them rather than allowing them to live in your community, you're the bad guy.

The Palestinians have made their objective quite clear. If they're allowed to "return" (very few of them ever were there in the first place) they'll vote for a government that will do what they want to do.

Of course they will. Any group of people will vote for a government that will do what they want it to do. That's perfectly reasonable.

But here's where your inability to formulate an objection to the Palestinian position without relying on racism and religious bigotry becomes apparent:

Genocide.

In your mind, Palestinians are evil by nature and nurture, implacable and bloodthirsty. That's your racist, bigoted worldview in a nutshell.

And the solution you propose, the one you say Bibi will implement rather than allow Palestinians refugees back into Israel, is the Final one. Mass murder and genocide. You call it self-defense, just like the men who planned and carried out the first Final Solution did, for the same reason and in hopes of achieving the same goal - fear and hatred of a ethnic/religious group, and in hopes of ensuring that the 'undesirables' would never return to the ethno-state from which they'd been expelled.

Derec, are you paying attention?

 

[angelo]

The truth, if an antisemite can stomach it!

https://www.aish.com/jw/me/The-Truth-about-Palestinians.html

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Of course they will. Any group of people will vote for a government that will do what they want it to do. That's perfectly reasonable.

But here's where your inability to formulate an objection to the Palestinian position without relying on racism and religious bigotry becomes apparent:

Genocide.

In your mind, Palestinians are evil by nature and nurture, implacable and bloodthirsty. That's your racist, bigoted worldview in a nutshell.

And the solution you propose, the one you say Bibi will implement rather than allow Palestinians refugees back into Israel, is the Final one. Mass murder and genocide. You call it self-defense, just like the men who planned and carried out the first Final Solution did, for the same reason and in hopes of achieving the same goal - fear and hatred of a ethnic/religious group, and in hopes of ensuring that the 'undesirables' would never return to the ethno-state from which they'd been expelled.

Derec, are you paying attention?

They explicitly say they want to purge the Jews. Why do you think they wouldn't do exactly that?

 

[Arctish]

The truth, if an antisemite can stomach it!

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means" - Inigo Montoya

https://www.aish.com/jw/me/The-Truth-about-Palestinians.html

That video is pretty interesting in what it says and doesn't say about the region. I'd be happy to go over it point by point with you but for now I just want to highlight a couple of things that jumped out as I watched it.

After giving some historical background on the area from the time of the Philistine City States to the Ottoman Empire, the narrator says "Two populations lived under the Mandate of Palestine, Arab and Jewish, both of them considered Palestinians." The video shows a drawing of a man on the left in Middle Eastern garb labeled 'Palestinian Arab', and one on the right wearing European style clothing labeled 'Palestinian Jew'. But here's what the Old Yishuv Jews of Palestine looked like when the British took over from the Ottomans:



The guy in the middle is wearing a style of hat associated with Jews, but check out the guy on the left. He's wearing Middle Eastern robes just like the guy on the left in the drawing. The video is trying to make a clear distinction by not presenting an accurate portrayal of what Palestinian Jews actually looked like. Here's another image:




Also, notice how after spending a significant amount of time explaining the origin of the term Palestinian, the narrator never bothers to explain why we should call non-Jewish Palestinians Arabs. That term just appears without explanation. It seems to me the creators of that video are trying to gloss over the European heritage and ancestry of the newly arrived immigrants by presenting them as representative of Palestinian Jews while deliberately obscuring the heritage and ancestry of the Palestinian Muslims and Christians, and their very close association with Jews whose ancestors never left the area.

The next part that struck me as odd was ~ 3:37 when the narrator asked if these two claims are true:

1) "There was no period in history without the presence of the Palestinian people on this land."
2) "Our Lord Jesus was the first Palestinian to be tortured in this land."

The narrator says both are false, then employs some stupid word tricks to explain that Jesus was born before the Romans used the old name for their newly established province, therefore you can't use the modern term for someone born in a place called Palestine for thousands of years, and completely ignores the obvious falsehood that Jesus wasn't the first one to be tortured there.

The narrator doesn't even bother to address the first claim. I guess we're just supposed to agree that the ancient people of Palestine can't be called Palestinians by modern day Palestinians. I think the reason we're led to that assumption is because it's a backdoor means to undermining their right of modern day Palestinians to call Palestine their ancestral homeland.

Anyway, the real shenanigans happened at the 4:15-4:30 mark, when the narrator says "Israel and the international community have endorsed Palestinian national aspirations through repeated peace offers based on a Two State solution. Unfortunately for everyone in the region, Palestinian and Arab leaders have rejected all of these offers" As the narrator speaks, a list of four proposals is presented:

1937 Peel Commission
1947 UN Partition Plan
2000 Camp David Summit
2008 Annapolis Process

First off, bullshit. Israel did not endorse Palestinian national aspirations. Israel didn't even exist when the first two proposals on that list were made. And the Zionists who created Israel were absolutely against the formation of a Palestinian State in Eretz Yisreal. But the real deception is a certain glaring omission.

Something important isn't on that list, probably because including it would completely refute the point that video creators are trying to make. I wonder if you know what it is.

 

[Arctish]

Of course they will. Any group of people will vote for a government that will do what they want it to do. That's perfectly reasonable.

But here's where your inability to formulate an objection to the Palestinian position without relying on racism and religious bigotry becomes apparent:

Genocide.

In your mind, Palestinians are evil by nature and nurture, implacable and bloodthirsty. That's your racist, bigoted worldview in a nutshell.

And the solution you propose, the one you say Bibi will implement rather than allow Palestinians refugees back into Israel, is the Final one. Mass murder and genocide. You call it self-defense, just like the men who planned and carried out the first Final Solution did, for the same reason and in hopes of achieving the same goal - fear and hatred of a ethnic/religious group, and in hopes of ensuring that the 'undesirables' would never return to the ethno-state from which they'd been expelled.

Derec, are you paying attention?

They explicitly say they want to purge the Jews. Why do you think they wouldn't do exactly that?

'They' say it? Every single one you propose murdering in a nuclear firestorm? Or are you just making sweeping generalizations about inherent character of an ethnic/religious group based on your fear and hatred of them, and trying to justify your endorsement of mass murder by accusing them of planning to do what you yourself are proposing?

 

[angelo]

The truth, if an antisemite can stomach it!

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means" - Inigo Montoya

https://www.aish.com/jw/me/The-Truth-about-Palestinians.html

That video is pretty interesting in what it says and doesn't say about the region. I'd be happy to go over it point by point with you but for now I just want to highlight a couple of things that jumped out as I watched it.

After giving some historical background on the area from the time of the Philistine City States to the Ottoman Empire, the narrator says "Two populations lived under the Mandate of Palestine, Arab and Jewish, both of them considered Palestinians." The video shows a drawing of a man on the left in Middle Eastern garb labeled 'Palestinian Arab', and one on the right wearing European style clothing labeled 'Palestinian Jew'. But here's what the Old Yishuv Jews of Palestine looked like when the British took over from the Ottomans:

View attachment 21572

The guy in the middle is wearing a style of hat associated with Jews, but check out the guy on the left. He's wearing Middle Eastern robes just like the guy on the left in the drawing. The video is trying to make a clear distinction by not presenting an accurate portrayal of what Palestinian Jews actually looked like. Here's another image:

View attachment 21571


Also, notice how after spending a significant amount of time explaining the origin of the term Palestinian, the narrator never bothers to explain why we should call non-Jewish Palestinians Arabs. That term just appears without explanation. It seems to me the creators of that video are trying to gloss over the European heritage and ancestry of the newly arrived immigrants by presenting them as representative of Palestinian Jews while deliberately obscuring the heritage and ancestry of the Palestinian Muslims and Christians, and their very close association with Jews whose ancestors never left the area.

The next part that struck me as odd was ~ 3:37 when the narrator asked if these two claims are true:

1) "There was no period in history without the presence of the Palestinian people on this land."
2) "Our Lord Jesus was the first Palestinian to be tortured in this land."

The narrator says both are false, then employs some stupid word tricks to explain that Jesus was born before the Romans used the old name for their newly established province, therefore you can't use the modern term for someone born in a place called Palestine for thousands of years, and completely ignores the obvious falsehood that Jesus wasn't the first one to be tortured there.

The narrator doesn't even bother to address the first claim. I guess we're just supposed to agree that the ancient people of Palestine can't be called Palestinians by modern day Palestinians. I think the reason we're led to that assumption is because it's a backdoor means to undermining their right of modern day Palestinians to call Palestine their ancestral homeland.

Anyway, the real shenanigans happened at the 4:15-4:30 mark, when the narrator says "Israel and the international community have endorsed Palestinian national aspirations through repeated peace offers based on a Two State solution. Unfortunately for everyone in the region, Palestinian and Arab leaders have rejected all of these offers" As the narrator speaks, a list of four proposals is presented:

1937 Peel Commission
1947 UN Partition Plan
2000 Camp David Summit
2008 Annapolis Process

First off, bullshit. Israel did not endorse Palestinian national aspirations. Israel didn't even exist when the first two proposals on that list were made. And the Zionists who created Israel were absolutely against the formation of a Palestinian State in Eretz Yisreal. But the real deception is a certain glaring omission.

Something important isn't on that list, probably because including it would completely refute the point that video creators are trying to make. I wonder if you know what it is.

And that would be..........................................................?

 

[angelo]

As I've said before, one cannot negotiate with someone who is dead set on destroying you! Further. Gays and other minorities are in mortal danger everywhere else except in Israel.

Kenya's High Court has upheld a law banning gay sex keeping same-sex relationships by 14 years jail in the conservative East African natio.

Same- sex relationships are a crime in more than 70 countries around the world, almost half of them in Africa.

South Africa is the only African nation to have legalised gay marriage.

Rights campaigners in Kenya say sexual minorities are routinely abused, assaulted by mobs, raped or enslaved.

Unheard of in places such as Gaza etc where gays are thrown off buildings to their deaths.

 

[Arctish]

Something important isn't on that list, probably because including it would completely refute the point that video creators are trying to make. I wonder if you know what it is.

And that would be..........................................................?

The Oslo Accords.