View Full Version : Exposed; Documented evidence of Israeli ethnic cleansing
Israel admits it revoked residency rights of quarter million Palestinians since 1967
Many of those prevented from returning were students or young professionals, working aboard to support their families.
Israel stripped more than 100,000 residents of Gaza and some 140,000 residents of the West Bank of their residency rights during the 27 years between its conquest of the territories in 1967 and the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in 1994.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-admits-it-revoked-residency-rights-of-quarter-million-palestinians-since-1967.premium-1.435778
Israel stripped 140,000 Palestinians of residency rights, document reveals
Israel stripped thousands of Palestinians of their right to live in the West Bank over a 27-year period, forcing most of them into permanent exile abroad, a document obtained under freedom of information laws has disclosed.
Saeb Erekat, the former Palestinian chief negotiator whose brother lost his residency rights after leaving to study in the US, described the policy as a war crime.
Israel was "engaging in a systematic policy of displacement ... to change the demographic composition of the occupied Palestinian territories", he said in a statement.
"This policy should not only be seen as a war crime as it is under international law; it also has a humanitarian dimension. We are talking about people who left Palestine to study or work temporarily but who could not return to resume their lives in their country with their families."
The process began at the start of Israel's occupation of the West Bank in 1967 and ended in 1994 when the Palestinian Authority was established under the Oslo accords.
However, the practice of revoking the residency rights of Palestinians in east Jerusalem has accelerated in recent years.
Richard Falk, an investigator for the United Nations human rights council, described this as "the forcible eviction of long-residing Palestinians ... [which] can only be described in its cumulative impact as a form of ethnic cleansing".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/11/israel-palestinians-residency-rights
This evidence is not ' new ' to anybody who has even a passing interest in international law with regard to the Zionists' invasion of Palestine post-WW2 and the subsequent implementation of the ethnic cleansing policies described by early Zionist leaders and speakers such as ben Gurion and Jabotinsky. Their speeches and writings are a matter of historic record and serve as evidence in themselves that Zionism , even in its early days, was a policy of brutal ethnic cleansing. e.g.
# Ben-Gurion in an address to the central committee of the Histadrut on 30 December 1947:
“In the area allocated to the Jewish State there are not more than 520,000 Jews and about 350,000 non-Jews, mostly Arabs. Together with the Jews of Jerusalem, the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment will be about a million, including almost 40 percent non-Jews. Such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority…. There can be no stable and strong Jewish State so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60 percent.”
Ben-Gurion wrote: "The compulsory transfer of the Arabs from the valleys of the proposed Jewish state could give us something which we have never had, even when we stood on our own during the days of the First and Second Temples: [a Galilee almost free of non-Jews]. ... We are being given an opportunity which we never dared to dream of in our wildest imagination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission
* So it is simply not possible to deny that Zionism equates with ethnic cleansing and, as such, is a racist doctrine. In fact, Zionism was actually declared to be a racist doctrine by the UNited Nations General Assembly in 1975. It was only after many years of pressure from Israel's protector and benefactor, the US of AIPAC ( if you'll forgive the apt description ) that this Resolution was reversed- the first and only time in the history of the UN that such a thing has happened. Such is the power of the Israel lobby, not only over Washington, as described in Walt and Mearscheimers ' Israel Lobby' papers ;
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/john-mearsheimer/the-israel-lobby
but through Washington all the way to the seat of international law, the United Nations itself. So we are all - that is all of us who oppose Zionism and support the Palestinian State, some 80% of the world's represented population- being denied our rightful access to justice and the rule of law by US of AIPAC policy and actions, both of which are determined by pressure upon Washington's elected officials by the power of Tel Aviv directed through its US branch- AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Of course, this is not solely a Jewish organisation. There are not enough American Jews supportive of the Zionist State to make AIPAC a powerful sectarian organisation. AIPAC is supported by America's evangelical movement, which gives it a far wider voting base which Congressmen and Senators cannot ignore- if they value their reputations and therefore their jobs. Criticism of Zionism engenders choruses of ' racist' and ' anti-Semite ' from supporters of the Zionist cause- and we see now that these supporters are actually supportive of ethnic cleansing.
It is not at all difficult to present evidence which characterizes the neozionist government currently polluting the Knesset as fascist. Any reasonable definition of fascism immediately sticks to the regime . So what can Americans do about having their government enslaved to the ethnic cleansing desires of a foreign power ? That's what it is- enslavement to Israel . Israel's activities are contrary to international and humanitarian law. If we want to continue to promote international and humanitarian law then we must break Zionism's hold over Washington.
Former Senator William Fulbright, in the 1970s, and former senior CIA official Victor Marchetti, in the 1980s, contended that AIPAC should have registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).[30] FARA requires those who receive funds or act on behalf of a foreign government to register as a foreign agent. However, AIPAC states that the organization is a registered American lobbying group, funded by private donations, and maintains it receives "no financial assistance" from Israel or any other foreign group.[31]
Even if the funding claim is contentious- *and it is- * there's no doubt that AIPAC acts on behalf of a foreign government.
wingrider
06-12-2012, 04:31 AM
usually when the term "ethnic cleansing " is used it has a different meaning that just forcing people out of their homes.. just saying.
wingrider
06-12-2012, 04:36 AM
A term sometimes used for Genocide-lite: "Ethnic cleansing:"The term "ethnic cleansing" was first commonly used to refer to the genocide organized during the early 1990s by Serbian Orthodox Christians in Bosnia Herzegovina. Their victims were primarily Muslims.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
Although that genocide was obviously based on religious hatred and intolerance, it was called an "ethnic" problem.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
Although it involved genocide, it was referred to as "cleansing" as if its victims were merely politely requested to please move to a different location.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
The "cleansing" part of the term might imply to some that the victims are in some way dirty, filthy and sub-human -- not worthy of continuing to live.
The term is still frequently used to refer to all types of mass murder and massacres, including the world's most serious current genocide in Darfur, Sudan (as of 2007).
here ya go.. now did any of these things happen??
Lmao the US of AIPAC.....the US of A controlled by AIPAC. Such is truly a joke and of course not realistic at all. Coming from a foreigner who knows absolutely nothing about Mother Company and where the real money comes from. If it wasn't so damn riduculous it would be actually funny. But then what would any expect coming from those that are against the Israelis and the Americans.
Even with this link.....once again no evidence whatsoever that AIPAC controls the US.
Sultan
06-12-2012, 05:44 AM
A term sometimes used for Genocide-lite: "Ethnic cleansing:"
The term "ethnic cleansing" was first commonly used to refer to the genocide organized during the early 1990s by Serbian Orthodox Christians in Bosnia Herzegovina. Their victims were primarily Muslims.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
Although that genocide was obviously based on religious hatred and intolerance, it was called an "ethnic" problem.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
Although it involved genocide, it was referred to as "cleansing" as if its victims were merely politely requested to please move to a different location.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/_themes/topo/topbul1d.gif
The "cleansing" part of the term might imply to some that the victims are in some way dirty, filthy and sub-human -- not worthy of continuing to live.
The term is still frequently used to refer to all types of mass murder and massacres, including the world's most serious current genocide in Darfur, Sudan (as of 2007).
here ya go.. now did any of these things happen??
Yes
ethnic cleansing
ethnic cleansing
noun the elimination of an unwanted ethnic group or groups from a society, as by genocide or forced emigration.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethnic+cleansing
Sultan
06-12-2012, 05:47 AM
From the UN
The official United Nations definition of ethnic cleansing is
"rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove from a given area persons of another ethnic or religious group."
Sultan
06-12-2012, 05:49 AM
The zionists are ethnically cleansing Palestine and their aim is to fully 'wipe it from the map'
They just need a little more time and Americans to finance the last two remaining small parts of it. Then they can re write the atlases like they do history books.
wingrider
06-12-2012, 06:11 AM
instead of fighting why don't you all assimilate the isrealis by marrying them .. in a couple of generations.. no more of them they will all be of your ethnic group .
wingrider
06-12-2012, 06:12 AM
oh wait they already are,, all are semetic.. I forgot that for a moment .. basically all of you are cousins.
Sultan
06-12-2012, 06:29 AM
oh wait they already are,, all are semetic.. I forgot that for a moment .. basically all of you are cousins.
European zionists are not semitic
Chinese zionists are not semitic
is this guy semitic?
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4vH7pWQ5sWE/0.jpg
Sultan
06-12-2012, 06:30 AM
These?
http://ziomania.com/african-jews/ethiopian%20jews60.jpg
Sultan
06-12-2012, 07:30 AM
ZIONIST ETHNIC CLEANSING 1967-1994
still in progress
By Al Arabiya
Almost quarter of a million Palestinians -- 100,000 residents of Gaza and 140,000 residents of the West Bank -- have been stripped of their residency rights between 1967 and 1994, an Israeli daily reported on Tuesday.
Accordingly, around 240,000 Palestinians who left the territories were barred from ever returning, many of whom were students or young professionals, working abroad to support their families, Israel’s daily Haaretz reported.
http://www.sign.com/images/clipart/Safety%20First/Notice/Vertical/notiV108%20-%20no%20admittance%20without%20a%20permit.jpg
The data on Gaza residency rights was released by the Defense Ministry’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) this week, in response to a freedom-of-information request filed by Hamoked (The Center for the Defense of the Individual), the report said.
According to COGAT data, 44,730 Gazans lost their residency rights because they were absent from the territory for seven or more years. 54,730 others lost their residency because they did not respond to the 1981 census; while the remaining 7,249 lost theirs because they didn’t respond to the 1988 census.
15,000 of those deprived of residency are now aged 90 or older, according to Haaretz.
Had Israel not followed a policy of revoking residency rights from anyone who left the area for an extended period of time, Gaza’s population today would have been more than 10 percent higher than its current growth rate of 3.3 percent a year.
As for the West Bank resident who went abroad, they were required to leave their identity card at the border crossing. Those Palestinians received a special permit valid for three years, according to Haaretz. The permit could be renewed three times, each time for one year. But any Palestinian who failed to return within six months after his permit expired would be stripped of his residency with no prior notice.
The West Bank’s population growth rate currently stands at 3 percent. It would have been much higher if Israel did not apply such procedure along the 27 years between its conquest of the territories in 1967 and the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in 1994.
Hamoked said that stripping tens of thousands of Palestinians of their residency -- and thus effectively exiling them permanently from their homeland -- is a grave violation of international law.
The report published by Haaretz pointed out that a similar procedure is currently being applied by the Israeli authorities to East Jerusalem residents. A Palestinian who lives abroad for seven years or more loses his right to return to the city.
However, COGAT said there were various ways for Palestinians to get their residency restored and some of those Gazans who lost their residency rights later regained them.
Since many of those who lost their residency rights in both Gaza and the West Bank were students or young professionals at that time, their descendants today might exceed hundreds of thousands. But several thousands who were affiliated with the Palestinian Authority were granted the right to return in 1994; still other Palestinians have since been allowed to return for a variety of reasons.
Yet, the number of Palestinians still listed today as having lost their residency rights is about 130,000.
More than 760,000 Palestinians -- estimated today to number 4.7 million with their descendants -- fled or were driven out of their homes in the Arab-Israeli war which accompanied the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948.
Around 160,000 Palestinians stayed behind and are now known as Arab Israelis. They number about 1.3 million people, or some 20 percent of the population.
Sultan
06-12-2012, 07:48 AM
(Reuters) - African migrants chosen for deportation from Israel were nervously awaiting a knock on the door or a tap on the shoulder on Tuesday as immigration officials rounded up hundreds for departure flights due to begin at the weekend.
"The people are very tense. It's pretty traumatic," said Jacob Berri, a spokesman for the South Sudanese community of migrants, the first to be repatriated under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's emergency plan.
"There are children here who only speak Hebrew. They won't even know the language where they're going," Berri said.
Africans were being stopped on the street and issued deportation orders, he added. "About 100 more have been arrested this morning."
Many of the migrants have been working in hotels and restaurants, while others have been holding down manual jobs or working as contracted day labour. All of them were technically working illegally.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/12/uk-israel-africans-idUKBRE85B0J420120612
http://s4.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20120612&t=2&i=617868590&w=&fh=&fw=&ll=700&pl=300&r=2012-06-12T113046Z_1_CBRE85B0VZB00_RTROPTP_0_ISRAEL-AFRICANS
http://sepiamagazineonline.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/where-niggers-belong.jpg
Lmao the US of AIPAC.....the US of A controlled by AIPAC. Such is truly a joke and of course not realistic at all. Coming from a foreigner who knows absolutely nothing about Mother Company and where the real money comes from. If it wasn't so damn riduculous it would be actually funny. But then what would any expect coming from those that are against the Israelis and the Americans.
Even with this link.....once again no evidence whatsoever that AIPAC controls the US.
Nobody has offered any evidence that "* AIPAC controls the US " because that was never the premise. *That's an invented exaggeration , perhaps intended as camouflage for the real premise- *that the Israel Lobby holds an unhealthy sway over Washington for the benefit of a foreign power. *This fact is evident on almost a daily basis. *Today, for example;
Israeli MK, AIPAC behind Senate bid to cut total number of Palestinian refugees
Newly passed amendment requires State Department to specify how many of the 5 million Palestinians who receive aid from the UN are refugees who were personally displaced from their homes in 1948, and how many are their descendants.
Capitol Hill in Washington was rocked late last month when the Senate Appropriations Committee approved an amendment requiring the State Department, for the first time, to do a "count" of Palestinian refugees.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/israeli-mk-aipac-behind-senate-bid-to-cut-total-number-of-palestinian-refugees.premium-1.435787
Now who could that be who is ' rocking Capitol Hill ' *? * * From the mouth of an Israeli* Knesset member . * Now it's for you to try to persuade that AIPAC has no sway over Washington- *in the light of evidence that it does. * There is , of course, much, much more. *Good luck.* *
Nobody has offered any evidence that "* AIPAC controls the US " because that was never the premise. *That's an invented exaggeration , perhaps intended as camouflage for the real premise- *that the Israel Lobby holds an unhealthy sway over Washington for the benefit of a foreign power. *This fact is evident on almost a daily basis. *Today, for example;
Now who could that be who is ' rocking Capitol Hill ' *? * * From the mouth of an Israeli* Knesset member . * Now it's for you to try to persuade that AIPAC has no sway over Washington- *in the light of evidence that it does. * There is , of course, much, much more. *Good luck.* *
The only thing you are correct on is that you still have not provided any evidence AIPAC Controls The US......and that you are inventing an exaggeration. :grin:
The only thing you are correct on is that you still have not provided any evidence AIPAC Controls The US......and that you are inventing an exaggeration. :grin:
Clinging to a burning strawman is not a recipe for improvement. * Post #14 clearly denounces your premise as an exaggeration. * All you have to do in order to counter that is to produce the post which contains the premise that ' AIPAC controls the US '. * There isn't one, of course. * Strawman is toast.*
Clinging to a burning strawman is not a recipe for improvement. * Post #14 clearly denounces your premise as an exaggeration. * All you have to do in order to counter that is to produce the post which contains the premise that ' AIPAC controls the US '. * There isn't one, of course. * Strawman is toast.*
Which is exactly what are you doing when you state AIPAC Controls the US. Your post 14 does not prove that AIPAC Controls the US. Perhaps you can try and ask other Americans. Such is way better than trying to falsify information. :wink:
Which is exactly what are you doing when you state AIPAC Controls the US. Your post 14 does not prove that AIPAC Controls the US. Perhaps you can try and ask other Americans. Such is way better than trying to falsify information. :wink:
Not at all. *The premise that ' AIPAC controls the US ' is yours entirely. * My premise, and I state it again in wriggle-free terms- *is that AIPAC exerts an unhealthy sway over Washington. *Hence the term ' US of AIPAC '. * It's clearly intended as a foreign-policy-related term . *Your exaggeration attempts to paint it as a total control over North America. *Now, I shouldn't have to put you straight again - *unless it's your intent to obfuscate. *So move on and accept the criticism. *Check the thread topic again, absorb its content, comment on it in adult terms. * That's what a forum is for. *Burning strawman department is in the basement , on the extreme right. *
Not at all. *The premise that ' AIPAC controls the US ' is yours entirely. * My premise, and I state it again in wriggle-free terms- *is that AIPAC exerts an unhealthy sway over Washington. *Hence the term ' US of AIPAC '. * It's clearly intended as a foreign-policy-related term . *Your exaggeration attempts to paint it as a total control over North America. *Now, I shouldn't have to put you straight again - *unless it's your intent to obfuscate. *So move on and accept the criticism. *Check the thread topic again, absorb its content, comment on it in adult terms. * That's what a forum is for. *Burning strawman department is in the basement , on the extreme right. *
Crying about you changing your terminology from what you were originally arguing and trying to correlate such to an adult conversation is hardly insulting to one that don't have a conscience. Beside you can call me what you like Moon.....just don't call me late for supper. Otherwise it's your azz.
But it is good to know you are learning and that you FINALLY Admit the US is Not Controled by AIPAC.
Did you know that OIL lobbists have 5 times the money than AIPAC does? What do you think of the Insurance Lobbists that are all involved in the US Healthcare System? How do you think these two make AIPAC look like childs-play?
Crying about you changing your terminology from what you were originally arguing and trying to correlate such to an adult conversation is hardly insulting to one that don't have a conscience. Beside you can call me what you like Moon.....just don't call me late for supper. Otherwise it's your azz.
But it is good to know you are learning and that you FINALLY Admit the US is Not Controled by AIPAC.
Did you know that OIL lobbists have 5 times the money than AIPAC does? What do you think of the Insurance Lobbists that are all involved in the US Healthcare System? How do you think these two make AIPAC look like childs-play?
*I haven't changed any terminology and my original term stands- *' US of AIPAC '. * *I made no claim that AIPAC controls America- *that is your own assumption and I suggest that your invented exaggeration is contrived to obfuscate. * AIPAC exerts an unhealthy control over Washington- *hence the term US of AIPAC. * Now, you can attempt to deny that AIPAC exerts an unhealthy control over Washington if you like- *but it's a denial that is easily put down. *Still, you're not going to be put off by facts, I hazard to guess, so you're welcome to proceed with your denials. *I'll just get my slap-down material prepared.*
Burning strawman department is in the basement , on the extreme right.
*I haven't changed any terminology and my original term stands- *' US of AIPAC '. * *I made no claim that AIPAC controls America- *that is your own assumption and I suggest that your invented exaggeration is contrived to obfuscate. * AIPAC exerts an unhealthy control over Washington- *hence the term US of AIPAC. * Now, you can attempt to deny that AIPAC exerts an unhealthy control over Washington if you like- *but it's a denial that is easily put down. *Still, you're not going to be put off by facts, I hazard to guess, so you're welcome to proceed with your denials. *I'll just get my slap-down material prepared.*
Burning strawman department is in the basement , on the extreme right.
Does Washington Control the Country.....Moon?
Does Washington Control the Country.....Moon?
I'll give you the benefit of possible myopia in that you may have missed the express reference to foreign-related policy. * *No more silly questions, please.*
I'll give you the benefit of possible myopia in that you may have missed the express reference to foreign-related policy. * *No more silly questions, please.*
Answer the question Moon does Washington Control the US? Its not a silly question with the terminology you like to use.
Answer the question Moon does Washington Control the US? Its not a silly question with the terminology you like to use.
**No dodging now, post #22 is adequate response.* *It leads you to post #18 wherein you'll find the reference you missed.* *Then you'll see that your question was silly.
*No dodging now, post #22 is adequate response.* *It leads you to post #18 wherein you'll find the reference you missed.*
Right.....I can see you are not going to last long around here. Thats alright Moon as you can see where this was going.....
http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by moon http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=86451#post86451)
*I haven't changed any terminology and my original term stands- *' US of AIPAC '. * *I made no claim that AIPAC controls America- *that is your own assumption and I suggest that your invented exaggeration is contrived to obfuscate. * AIPAC exerts an unhealthy control over Washington- *hence the term US of AIPAC. * Now, you can attempt to deny that AIPAC exerts an unhealthy control over Washington if you like- *but it's a denial that is easily put down. *Still, you're not going to be put off by facts, I hazard to guess, so you're welcome to proceed with your denials. *I'll just get my slap-down material prepared.*
Burning strawman department is in the basement , on the extreme right.
Since if you say Washington Controls the US. Then I can come back and use your little play with terminology. Wherein again you state clearly that AIPAC exerts an unhealthy CONTROL over Washington. As in they are controlling Washington. Perhaps you became confused when learning that OLD English. :laugh:
Right.....I can see you are not going to last long around here. Thats alright Moon as you can see where this was going.....
http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by moon http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=86451#post86451)
*I haven't changed any terminology and my original term stands- *' US of AIPAC '. * *I made no claim that AIPAC controls America- *that is your own assumption and I suggest that your invented exaggeration is contrived to obfuscate. * AIPAC exerts an unhealthy control over Washington- *hence the term US of AIPAC. * Now, you can attempt to deny that AIPAC exerts an unhealthy control over Washington if you like- *but it's a denial that is easily put down. *Still, you're not going to be put off by facts, I hazard to guess, so you're welcome to proceed with your denials. *I'll just get my slap-down material prepared.*
Burning strawman department is in the basement , on the extreme right.
Since if you say Washington Controls the US. Then I can come back and use your little play with terminology. Wherein again you state clearly that AIPAC exerts an unhealthy CONTROL over Washington.
*You are getting closer to understanding what I have said. *In short, AIPAC exerts an unhealthy influence over Washington. *That's backed up by political professors writing out of the University of Chicago. *You've had the link. * AIPAC has been cited by some US Congressmen and Senators as being the agent of a foreign power *( link provided ) and should be sanctioned under the relevant Act. *AIPAC's intent is to promote the causes of Zionism over those of the United States. That is an opinion but the existence of Israel Firsters cannot be discounted. *AIPAC's influence, being linked with a foreign power, is in the spheres of foreign policy. * Any claim that I stated that AIPAC controlled America is a nonsense- *but then we've already determined that.
Right.....I can see you are not going to last long around here.
Is that an idle boast by a confused member or are you threatening me in your.....moderator's capacity ?*
Can one have influence but not control? Rhetorical question. Think about It!
Can one have influence but not control? Rhetorical question. Think about It!
*No, it's not ' a rhetorical question' at all. * To be ' a rhetorical question ' the premise must be obvious from the facts. *It's actually perfectly plain that influence does not equate to control. * *You think about it.*
*No, it's not ' a rhetorical question' at all. * To be ' a rhetorical question ' the premise must be obvious from the facts. *It's actually perfectly plain that influence does not equate to control. * *You think about it.*
Then perhaps you might want to use the correct terminology or explain yourself better! As those were the terms YOU used, so think about that while trying to catch up.
Then perhaps you might want to use the correct terminology or explain yourself better! As those were the terms YOU used, so think about that while trying to catch up.
No, you're mistaken. *I've been quite lucid in explaining* AIPAC's power and influence. * The problem appears to be that you don't actually want it to be true. *That's a waste of energy. *
No, you're mistaken. *I've been quite lucid in explaining* AIPAC's power and influence. * The problem appears to be that you don't actually want it to be true. *That's a waste of energy. *
Once again all you did was prove with your Old English that you didnt know the difference between Control and Influence. Thanks for finally admitting it to the entire site.
IOnce again all you did was prove with your Old English that you didnt know the difference between Control and Influence. Thanks for finally admitting it to the entire site.
I haven't been asked to define either ' control' or ' influence '. * Would you like me to do it now ? *
What's ' Old English ' *? * *
I haven't been asked to define either ' control' or ' influence '. * Would you like me to do it now ? *
What's ' Old English ' *? * *
Such is not on me for your inability to use those terms in their proper context. Now that it has been clarified.
You were saying something about Israel being exposed for ethnic cleansing. Does this mean there will be more Resolutions filed in the UN against Israel.....with New Charges?
Such is not on me for your inability to use those terms in their proper context. Now that it has been clarified. *
Oh, it's ' been clarified ' alright. **
*
You were saying something about Israel being exposed for ethnic cleansing. Does this mean there will be more Resolutions filed in the UN against Israel.....with New Charges?
*You must be referring to the thread topic. * Yes, let's hope so. *It's abundantly clear that Zionism is a racist doctrine and that the Zionism is Racist Resolution of 1975 should be reinstated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_3379
You object to ethnically cleansing yourself, of course ?*
No ? *You condone ethnic cleansing ?*
wingrider
06-13-2012, 03:26 AM
I just love a family fued,,reminds me of the Hatfields and Mccoys. Isaac and Ismael have been fueding for almost 4000 years,
I just love a family fued,,reminds me of the Hatfields and Mccoys. Isaac and Ismael have been fueding for almost 4000 years,
I could ask you the same question. * Let's establish first whether or not you accept the actions of the neozionists as ethnic cleansing. *You appear to have some form of protectionist definition of the term.*
wingrider;
usually when the term "ethnic cleansing " is used it has a different meaning that just forcing people out of their homes.. just saying.
We're not talking about US banker's bullies evicting and foreclosing, of course. *We're talking about the systematic removal of innocent arabs from the Israeli and Palestinian demographic- *on an industrial scale as official policy.*
wingrider
06-13-2012, 05:55 AM
I could ask you the same question. * Let's establish first whether or not you accept the actions of the neozionists as ethnic cleansing. *You appear to have some form of protectionist definition of the term.*
wingrider;
We're not talking about US banker's bullies evicting and foreclosing, of course. *We're talking about the systematic removal of innocent arabs from the Israeli and Palestinian demographic- *on an industrial scale as official policy.*
innocent?? why do I think that is a misnomer. after all the rockets and suicide bombers I have heard about over the years? lets face it folks there are no innocents in this both sides are guity as sin . this is going to escalate until full blown war developes in the middle east, mostly because neither side will back down or even try to come to some form of compromise.. the arabs and the palestinians want Isreal destroyed, and the Isreal will defend herself as is her right,
innocent?? why do I think that is a misnomer. after all the rockets and suicide bombers I have heard about over the years? lets face it folks there are no innocents in this both sides are guity as sin . this is going to escalate until full blown war developes in the middle east, mostly because neither side will back down or even try to come to some form of compromise.. the arabs and the palestinians want Isreal destroyed, and the Isreal will defend herself as is her right,
You don't appear to have grasped the nature of the people being victimized in the OP article. * Would you care to review it or shall I reprint the descriptions ? *
wingrider
06-13-2012, 06:45 AM
nope don't botheraint only one side of the picture, while I look at the whole thing... you ar BOTH in the wrong. ...
That's a very unconvincing response. *Here's the gist of article again . *See if you can find any hint of the people being ethnically cleansed having the character of the ' terrorists ' you associate them with in your earlier post.
Israel stripped 140,000 Palestinians of residency rights, document reveals
Israel stripped thousands of Palestinians of their right to live in the West Bank over a 27-year period, forcing most of them into permanent exile abroad, a document obtained under freedom of information laws has disclosed.
Saeb Erekat, the former Palestinian chief negotiator whose brother lost his residency rights after leaving to study in the US, described the policy as a war crime.
Israel was "engaging in a systematic policy of displacement ... to change the demographic composition of the occupied Palestinian territories", he said in a statement.
"This policy should not only be seen as a war crime as it is under international law; it also has a humanitarian dimension. We are talking about people who left Palestine to study or work temporarily but who could not return to resume their lives in their country with their families."
The process began at the start of Israel's occupation of the West Bank in 1967 and ended in 1994 when the Palestinian Authority was established under the Oslo accords.
However, the practice of revoking the residency rights of Palestinians in east Jerusalem has accelerated in recent years.
Richard Falk, an investigator for the United Nations human rights council, described this as "the forcible eviction of long-residing Palestinians ... [which] can only be described in its cumulative impact as a form of ethnic cleansing".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...sidency-rights
Do you still maintain that this is not ethnic cleansing and that the victims are terrorist- related ?
wingrider
06-13-2012, 03:50 PM
you paint with a very fine brush,, and gloss over the facts of palestinians and others whose sole purpose in life is the extermination of Isreal,, I don't care how many one sided opinion pieces you post it will not change that fact one iota..
these are the facts as I see them
you all want Isreal destroyed
Isreal has the right to exist
solution to the problem WWIII
you paint with a very fine brush,, and gloss over the facts of palestinians and others whose sole purpose in life is the extermination of Isreal,, I don't care how many one sided opinion pieces you post it will not change that fact one iota..
these are the facts as I see them
you all want Isreal destroyed
Isreal has the right to exist
solution to the problem WWIII
True.....very True!
Sultan
06-13-2012, 05:05 PM
Moon
if you have not seen this you might like to bookmark it
Palestinian Great Book and Manuscript Robbery
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/witness/2012/05/20125915313256768.html
you paint with a very fine brush,, and gloss over the facts of palestinians and others whose sole purpose in life is the extermination of Isreal,, I don't care how many one sided opinion pieces you post it will not change that fact one iota..
*Are you calling the article in the OP ' a one-sided opinion-piece ' or is that just a useful diversionary canard when your philosophy stumbles over some facts ?**
*
Israel stripped 140,000 Palestinians of residency rights, document reveals
One-sided opinion piece ? **
Also, I've yet to see Mods and Chums respond to the question asked of them. *Do you favor ethnic cleansing or not ? * *I'm sure that various shades of political color can be accommodated, provide they don't degenerate into wriggling.*
One-sided opinion piece ? * This is the Israeli press;
Israel admits it revoked residency rights of quarter million Palestinians since 1967
These revealing Israeli official documents emphasize just a small operation in the Zionist ethnic cleansing machinery. *The process of slow ethnic cleansing is recorded in a myriad of daily occurrences, such as this;
Settler organization granted control over spring in East Jerusalem
Opponents say decision by zoning board is another way of imposing Israeli control over Palestinian resources.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/settler-organization-granted-control-over-spring-in-east-jerusalem-1.435783
Jerusalem, as any interested party knows, is Occupied Territory. *' Israeli law ' there has been declared void by the United Nations. * Yet these criminal activities continue unabated with the support of the US of AIPAC in the Security Council. *This is how Israel sullies America's reputation . *In Washington, the Israel Lobby works to ensure that only Zionism-friendly politicians find work. *That's how Tel Aviv protects its own criminal activities in the Security Council. *
wingrider
06-14-2012, 03:29 AM
you never responded to mine either,,
opponents of Isreal want her destroyed
Isreal has the right to defend herself
solution to the problem
WWIII
you never responded to mine either,,
opponents of Isreal want her destroyed
Isreal has the right to defend herself
solution to the problem
WWIII
*That wasn't a question. *You were asked a question directly. * *At a much earlier juncture. *
wingrider
06-15-2012, 04:18 PM
nope why should I feed you?
Feed Me ? * I asked if you supported ethnic cleansing. * The reason I asked this is because of your tacit support for it in this thread. * However, tacit support isn't incriminatory- *so I ask you again. *Do you favor ethnic cleansing ? *
wingrider
06-16-2012, 04:50 PM
I support Isreals right to exist as a nation,, you support the destruction of isreal ,, I really don't see how there is any common ground for us to discuss,, you have a lovely day,, and thank you.
I support Isreals right to exist as a nation,, you support the destruction of isreal ,, I really don't see how there is any common ground for us to discuss,, you have a lovely day,, and thank you.
You don't have a clue what I support or don't support. Your assumption is juvenile nonsense. Further, you were specifically asked about ethnic cleansing and your attempt to hide behind a polarization of the issue is laughably transparent.
Ethnic cleansing is- of course- abhorrent to any reasoning human being and attempts to peddle it as ' necessary ' in order to protect the ethnic cleansers are despicable . Decent people should hunt down the ethnic cleansers - and their supporters- and place the former in custody pending prosection by the international courts. The concept of Universal Jurisdiction exists for that purpose. Use it. Have them arrested when possible.
wingrider
06-17-2012, 01:53 PM
sorry but asking some people to move in my estimation is not ethnic cleansing,, now if the Isrealis were going into those settlements, and systematically killing men women and children just because they were arab or palistinians ,, then yeah you would have a case and i would agree with you,, but as it is, nah .. not so much
wingrider
06-17-2012, 01:54 PM
You don't have a clue what I support or don't support. Your assumption is juvenile nonsense. Further, you were specifically asked about ethnic cleansing and your attempt to hide behind a polarization of the issue is laughably transparent.
Ethnic cleansing is- of course- abhorrent to any reasoning human being and attempts to peddle it as ' necessary ' in order to protect the ethnic cleansers are despicable . Decent people should hunt down the ethnic cleansers - and their supporters- and place the former in custody pending prosection by the international courts. The concept of Universal Jurisdiction exists for that purpose. Use it. Have them arrested when possible.
all I can go by is from what you post and so far that has been hatred for Jews and Americans,,
Trinnity
06-17-2012, 03:28 PM
Ethnic cleansing is a mass murder of an ethnic group.
sorry but asking some people to move in my estimation is not ethnic cleansing,,
Nor mine....but that's not what's described in the reports. What's described in the reports- and by now I feel it's necessary to spell it out for you- is the systematic, government orchestrated, forced removal of many thousands of people from their rightful places of residence. That's just this one method, of course. There are many other methods used by the neozionists to ethnically cleanse Palestine.
Ethnic cleansing is a mass murder of an ethnic group.
That's simply ethnic cleansing in its most severe form. The aim of ethnic cleansing is to transfer an ethnic group. Killing them isn't necessary for the definition to apply under law. I suggest you refine your terms.
Peter1469
06-17-2012, 03:56 PM
Once the Arab states pay their ex-Jewish citizens who were forced out then we can worry about making Israel do the same to their Arab citizens.
Once the Arab states pay their ex-Jewish citizens who were forced out then we can worry about making Israel do the same to their Arab citizens.
Personal vendettas - in the guise of moral equivalence- have no legal standing . The Palestinians have been - and are being- ethnically cleansed. Other instances in relation to other ethnic groups are not relevant to their case.
Peter1469
06-17-2012, 04:34 PM
I would agree that the two are separate issues. But when the Jews were expelled from Arab lands they were not compensated and that likely affects the Jews' decisions today. If the Arabs would compensate the Jews (or their families) I imagine there would be a different position on today's issue.
Otherwise, I think the status quo will remain.
The ball is in your court.
Peter1469
06-17-2012, 04:35 PM
Ethnic cleansing is a mass murder of an ethnic group.
Ethnic cleansing can also be just moving people out of an area based on ethnicity.
wingrider
06-17-2012, 04:40 PM
Personal vendettas - in the guise of moral equivalence- have no legal standing . The Palestinians have been - and are being- ethnically cleansed. Other instances in relation to other ethnic groups are not relevant to their case.
in other words it is ok If arabs do it but not ok if isreal does it... nice double standard you got there
in other words it is ok If arabs do it but not ok if isreal does it... nice double standard you got there
You don't have any grounds to accuse me of ' double standards '- *none in this thread and none anywhere else. * I suggest that these baseless personal attacks characterize a lack of information on the subject and a desire to disguise that ignorance with populist banter and a propensity for keeping schtum when questioned. **
Again, cases of alleged ethnic cleansing elsewhere have no bearing on these reports of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by the neozionist regime.*
wingrider
06-18-2012, 11:21 PM
You don't have any grounds to accuse me of ' double standards '- *none in this thread and none anywhere else. * I suggest that these baseless personal attacks characterize a lack of information on the subject and a desire to disguise that ignorance with populist banter and a propensity for keeping schtum when questioned. **
Again, cases of alleged ethnic cleansing elsewhere have no bearing on these reports of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by the neozionist regime.* it wasn't personal... so get off your high horse it was generic aimed at all of those who would annihilate isreal or wish they could do so. not once di I amke it personally directed at you using your name.. you will know when I make it personal I will use your name.
it wasn't personal... so get off your high horse it was generic aimed at all of those who would annihilate isreal or wish they could do so. not once di I amke it personally directed at you using your name.. you will know when I make it personal I will use your name.
*You already did. *Your inappropriate comment was linked to me by way of a quote. * *( Post #63 ) * **
wingrider
06-19-2012, 05:28 AM
ok I see how you want to play this game...
ok I see how you want to play this game...
You do ? * *I see how you DON'T want to play this game.......with facts, evidence and reasoned debate. **
Once more with feeling;
You already did. *Your inappropriate comment was linked to me by way of a quote. * *( Post #63 ) * Any comment ?*
Goldie Locks
06-19-2012, 11:12 AM
Arab's use double standards. It's OK for them to do it, but not OK if Israel does it.
Duplicity and double standards are dishonorable and contemptible, no matter who displays them. * However, your comparison of ' arabs' and ' Israel ' is odd. * 25% of ' Israel ' are arabs. * Somebody tell you differently ?*
Duplicity and double standards are dishonorable and contemptible, no matter who displays them. * However, your comparison of ' arabs' and ' Israel ' is odd. * 25% of ' Israel ' are arabs. * Somebody tell you differently ?*
I didn't see her talking about what percentages of Israel's population is. Nor did Anyone else bring up any stats until you did. SO just how was your question relevant?(rhetorical question) As it's not! Also what would it matter if someone told her something different.
Her statement was about Arabs using double standards. Nowhere did she mention anything about the populations of the Country of Israel. Or were you seeing things with her response. Was it to difficult to focus on the part about Arabs having double standards?
Although we are glad that you can finaly admit those facts about duplicity and double standards. Perhaps you should keep that thought foremost in your mind when discussing Arabs and Muslims.
Let's run the post again for the benefit of the intended recipient without the useless interpretations of self-styled semantic overseers;
Duplicity and double standards are dishonorable and contemptible, no matter who displays them. * However, your comparison of ' arabs' and ' Israel ' is odd. * 25% of ' Israel ' are arabs. * Somebody tell you differently ?*
Let's run the post again for the benefit of the intended recipient without the useless interpretations of self-styled semantic overseers;
Duplicity and double standards are dishonorable and contemptible, no matter who displays them. * However, your comparison of ' arabs' and ' Israel ' is odd. * 25% of ' Israel ' are arabs. * Somebody tell you differently ?*
And once again Moon.....no where did she mention anything about the population of Israel. She also didn't say all Arabs are inside Israel either. See how that works. :wink:
Arab's use double standards. It's OK for them to do it, but not OK if Israel does it.
' Israel ' is 25% arab. * Your comparison of ' arabs ' and ' Israel ' therefore seems odd. * If you were to use the term 'Zionists ' instead of ' Israel ' then it might help you to make your intended point. *
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.