Syrians celebrate peace deal,Syria shells them.

How would it "undermine" the rights of the 20% who are arabs? As you and your ilk like to repeat, iranian jews have full rights and freedom in iran - which demands all nations call it the "islamic republic". And it did not get past me how you failed to mention the rights of jews living a future "palestinian" state - oh that's right - they are not allowed to live in one.

This is an example of how the far left has utterly lost any chance at mainstream acceptance - what does "fight the jew mean"? Make love to him? Is this Animal Farm?

When you try to defend the indefensible, like the obscene elements of the hamas charter, or when iran says "death to america" or "wipe israel off the map", your credibility collapses quickly, and any rational person will just shake their head. You are simply not going to be successful trying to obfuscate and confuse people with these ridiculous statements.

You don't seem to have much tolerance for the right of jews, so I'm not sure if you should even be commenting on someone else's perceived bigotry.

 

Only if one believes that Israel has become so horribly anti-Semite that it insists that all Arabs as being utterly evil. The "mass graves of Israeli jews" argument relies on European Guilt Complex misuse, hoping to fool well-intended Europeans into believing that it is acceptable to hate Arab Semites like how Nazis hated Jews. This is demonstrated with the heavy Israeli reliance on Nazi comparisons which are considered by the ADL as being anti-Semite:

NAZIS, COMMUNISTS, ARAB NATIONALIST TERRORISTS: ONE CAMP, ONE KAMPF
http://www.netanyahu.org/nazcomarnatt.html

Offensive Nazi Analogies Have No Place In Political Discourse
http://adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/6030_52.htm


Isn't it just lovely how the Israeli government relies heavily on its anti-Semite slurs to defend its racism?

 

What has Assad taught the world about the value of Arab life?

 

What you are doing is dictating to Hamas how they must view things so that you can use this dictation as a tool applied to fool well-intended gullible American victims of the European Guilt Complex into believing that illegal settlement expansions are necessary measures taken against hated Semites. Yet, for whatever reason, Hamas does not seem to do as commanded:

"Many changes have taken place in Hamas since 1988 and you have to take this into account. This [the charter] is not a reference for Hamas policy, especially in recent times," he said. "Hamas today is more open, more pragmatic. We are not against Jewish people. We are not against Jews because they are Jewish. We are against the occupation."
http://euobserver.com/24/28660

Of course, many gullible Americans are going to allow themselves to be fooled by your argument, but the question is for how much longer? For how much longer will gullible Americans allow themselves to be tricked by Israeli Guilt Complex misuse into hating Arab Semites?

 

Assad is supposed to represent the life of all hated Semites? Maybe you mean that Assad learned from Israel about what to do with hated Semites.

 

Not in exchange for nothing.

In exchange for a lasting and real peace. Supported by every arab state. Theyve the palestiians already said years ago the refugee return can be limited so that you dont get a flood of people.

I doubt theres many arabs willing now to resettle anyway. Withdrawal from Gaza is the initial step, the final settlement involves all the other details.

Something else to get real about? Lemme guess, arabs cant be trusted and israelis can etc etc.

 

1/ Simply because it means that the laws will always favour jews rather than all sides.

2/ Indeed Iran is an islamic republic. Who would or could defend that? Indeed do you really think that if Iran were negotiating with another power it would require it to be recognised as Islamic before negotiations continue? Or would it just ignore whatever the other side said and call itself what it likes. Thats what israel needs to do, call itself what it likes, and not ask palestinians to recognise any favouritism - but get out of palestinian land.

3/ Thats a great point for negotiation, one that so far israel has never even bothered to raise in objection so why should I mention it? Today however palestinians insist that jews already live in their territory under their authority.

1/ Nonsense, we are the mainstream. You are the minority.

2/ Fight the jew is a quotation from the quran regarding conflicts with jewish tribes that is used as a religious call to arms. There being no israel at the time, the quran doesnt say 'fight israel'.

Is there something confusing or obfuscating here you dont understand?

3/ Everytime you people on this forum say youre creibility collapses I have to laugh - you guys cant even get your own story straight.

I have every tolerance for jews to live wherever. But they need to respect the wishes of the local majority rather than impose their own because the condtions dont suit them.

 

So creation admits that the Islamic Republic by default is an Islamic Apartheid state.

 

Indeed its an islamic republic. It should be a state for all, and the supreme council must step down.

Its not occupying another peoples land though.

 

When and if Iran's disputed (and debunked) words turn into actions then you might have a point. As of now it's just bluster and rhetoric. Why do mere words terrify you so much?

 

Pakistan occupies Hindu Land, only has been smart enough never to let people back, same with Bangladesh.

 

They won't because they'd never acknowledge Israel as a homeland for jews, and will never cease trying to destroy the country, through either violence or demographics.

Lots of people on this forum, every day.

Iran's enemies or hostile countries do not question the right of iran to exist, as israel's enemies do. Since israel's very existence is questioned by its enemies, by acknowledging it is the "jewish" state it implicitly confirms its right to exist.

Which would accomplish nothing, just as it did from 1948-1967, when it did not occupy an inch of the west bank or gaza, but still was relentlessly attacked.

Of course israel has mentioned it, it is just you and some jew-haters here who prefer to gloss over the arab-based racism and hatred.

If that were true, israel would have been overrun long ago.

That is nonsense, as there are many online videos of their leaders affirming this statement. If it were not truthful, they would have excised it out of their charter.

Perhaps you should cry, it is the usual final emotion of israel's enemies.

Of course you do, I'm sure you'll mention how you have many jewish friends.

To people like you, jews are only tolerable if they are powerless and subjugated - sorry, but those days are over.

I'd also like to see some moderator get this thread back on topic, which is on the heinous mass murder of syrians by its fascist, illegal, illegitimate regime.

 

They already do. But not as a jewish state where jews from the world get priority treatment and arabs dont.

Rubbish, directly refuted.

They do. They question its right to exist as an islamic republic. They tell us thats an unjust imposition, that its essentially undemocratic. Thats a direct refutation.

It would accomplish everything you need. Your historical reference doesnt mention that it was because youd just moved into so many arab villages and were sitting in so many arab living rooms - like you still do today in east jerusalem - that you were attacked.

By the way, did yourfamily build your village or did you take it over?

Go on then.. tell us when.

Rubbish, weve only recently begun to realise what youve been up to all these years.

Go on then...show us one. Then tell us why Hamas doesnt just try to kill every jew its men have ever laid eyes on.

Laughter is more appropriate regarding ignorant bigots who shy from real historical debate like you.

Please dont act like a american black man, youre not an oppressed minority in my country. Jewish people are in power here, jewish people lead our political parties, and a good thing too - and so youre a liar too.

 

According to an border agreed by all sides. next.

 

India went for peace despite the suffering, the Palestinians opted for Jihad and cry big tears that the Jews refuse to give up their land

Not all people are willing to life in peace as equals, the Palestinians top number one in this regard.

 

The matter in india was discussed in the indian congress. No serious opposition was put to the division. Thats not the case with Palestine. And no party in india was a recent immigrant.

It wasnt the jews land, theyd just got off the boat.

 

Jews lived there, the land was shared, the Palestinians rejected. The Palestinians ( back then just Arabs) had no majority on the Jewish part.

Must suck to see the Jews having rights instead of living in yet another Islamic Apartheid state which you so cherish.

 

No the jews did not live there. They mostly came from europe.


The majority you speak of was inculcated by britain. Would it be ok for britain to introduce more muslims into the netherlands to set up their own state?

 

Nonsense! The Jews go back to Judea and Samaria 4,000 years ago. Those "palastians" don't live there.

 

Nonsense, only a few of them can claim that. The rest have more history in europe, their grandfathers and great such and such were not palestinians.

Where then do the palestinians live if not in palestine?

By the way are you a decent person or a silly bigot?

 

So where did the arabs come from? They moved from syria, egypt and jordan. Oh but that's right, only arabs can migrate - jews are not allowed such things.

Arab muslims can move to Europe, to the US, Canada, etc., to other arab muslim nations - but jews, well, they're not allowed.

 

The arabs came from elsewhere only before centuries of continued presence in a majority in palestine right up to the arrival of the british. They built the country themselves, exported cash crops, built the ports, the roads and built various industries as that majority - the jews of europe on arrival from palestine could claim no such thing.

Jews can move anywhere the locals want to accept them, same for everyone else. Arabs can indeed move to the US - but can they set up their own state there? Game set match.

 

You're hilarious. The arab migrants who came to the REGION called palestine and allegedly had been there "for centuries" - built up all these things - yet never formed their own country, or had any other identifiers of a nation?

The historical facts prove that it jews came from europe into areas mostly barren and formed farm collectives, which were worked on by arab migrant workers. Were there already existing cities, yes, but to claim that most of the arabs by the 1940s had not immigrated from neighboring countries is absurd nonsense.

According to your beliefs, the mexican farm workers in california have a right to take over the state...

Except the US exists as a sovereign nation, and jews entering the area were coming into a non-sovereign region. See the difference?

 

Yes. For centuries, thats what the data and the surveys and the historical accounts, plus all the built stuff tell us. They did have a country, in the same way many different had a country in europe even though theyd been under different empires for centuries.

The facts are that most arabs were not migrant workers at any time. Read Justin McCarthys study on the population changes in the period going from before the first aliyah.

As for mexican farm workers, according to your line about the jews from europe - they do. Its you who makes that argument not me.

Thats a direct refutation of everything youve just stated Spielgood, you feeling that?

You feel up for a detailed discussion? Or do you intend to troll me?

Ah yes, that old canard - sovereignty, last refuge of the scoundrel. If the arabs arrive with bigger guns to the US than the locals can muster, does that mean they are then sovereign?

 

Actually they mostly came from arab and muslim countries and the former British mandate.

The real world is pretty much the opposite of the one you imagined.