Comments on: What the Bleep?! This week’s hot Jewish news

By: Xper

Xper — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:26:43 +0000

A civilian does not loose his land and freedom (after war time) due to war. Iraq’s citizens did not loose their land and freedom to the America or Kuwait. Neither did the Japanese etc.

David and Dylan and the rest of the crowd can make up any cockamamie theory they wish. But in the end the whole world knows the truth. Palestinian civilians in the West Bank wake up every day to see their land stolen.

By: Dmitry Gringauz

Dmitry Gringauz — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:24:04 +0000

Here’s another bit of odd news. While not strictly jewish, it is about Iran, and something that can make old Pink Floyd fans proud:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIP38eq-ywc

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 04:50:31 +0000

Good point Dylan. To expand on it, the West Bank Arabs organized with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria to attack Israel in 1948 and again in 1967 in an attempt to drive her into the sea. They lost the wars and the land. They tried an intifada in recent years but it did not succeed. So … the new strategy is to convince the rest of the world that the military actions never happened and Israel stole their land. You can fool some of the people …

By: Dylan

Dylan — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:23:42 +0000

Wow, this is shaping up to be a very productive discussion. Not.

The reality is that almost every country of note at some point agreed to having certain borders, and then, as a result of war – offensive or defensive – acquired additional territory. This is certainly true of the UN “special five” – US, Russia, China, France, and Great Britain.

Code Pink and the like pretend that it’s not the case and treat Israel according to standards that do not apply to any other country.

By: xper

xper — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 10:51:06 +0000

My construct of native is exactly that the United Nations defined. The same definition that was in existence when the state of Israel was created. Now that’s pretty simple isn’t it or is it not. And i do realize that may be difficult for u to accept.

You may not mention the UN or League of Nations but that is the universally accepted definition. You seem to use the Ice Age, Bronze Age, Stone Age, microbial or Amoebic or any other wacky religious fantasy theories.

Try to answer my questions also by providing a breakdown of which “Age” do u use for your definition for which argument.