Hillary Clinton campaign advisers warn “don’t mention Israel” amongst activists

[Phoenall]

Correct in this

Yes if they are used for military/terrorist purposes, it is all in the Geneva conventions if you bother to look

which wasn't the case here. This was a case of the Zionists terrorizing civilians...

Israel Is Our Shield
The Jewish Homeland was set up by the British as a decoy to the inevitable next jihad. At that long-lost time, the ruling classes knew their history. But then, after World War II, the pro-Arab appeasement class took over again and tried to crush the independent Jewish state.

In 1956, equally ignorant President Eisenhower took the side of the Muslims in their seizure of the Suez Canal, betraying Israel, England, and France (which had built it, not the primitive Muslims).

In 1967, LBJ played both sides and passed on intelligence about Israeli movements in order to limit their victory in the Six-Day War. So that whole rotten century promoted ignorance about Nazislamis, which led directly to 9/11 and the continued invitation to sleeper cells to enter America and have their way.

actually, Ike had it right. 99% of our problems in that region are because we prop up the Zionist Entity. Oh, yeah, and the Suez Canal was rightfully Egypt's property.

Correct in this case it was to collapse underground tunnels, which were and are a valid legal military target.

The land was, the canal wasnt. And the rightful owners could have destroyed it and told Egypt to get on with living of the proceeds.

Your predeliction for using hate sites is showing again as they are the places that push the RACIST ANTI SEMITIC phrase "Zionist entity "

 

[Divine Wind]

The "Zionist Entity" is code for "******* Jews". Israel has a right to exist, get over it.

No the "Zionist Entity" is code for "A place that practices religious apartheid where colonists oppress the indigenous people".

The Zionist Entity is the last vestige of colonialism and imperialism. The world will not miss it when it is driven into the sea.

Translation: You're right, DW. I hate ******* Jews.

Thanks for your input, Joey.

 

[Phoenall]

Oh no, another mention of Rachel Corrie. Every time an anti-Semite brings up Rachel Corrie who was playing tag with a bulldozer which was attempting to dig up the landscaping in front of a house suspected of hiding a tunnel underneath to smuggle arms, I do not expect them to bring up the armed terrorists who were hiding in the offices of the group Rachel Corrie belonged to. I guess only Rachel Corrie counts and not the people who were murdered and terribly wounded by these terrorists.

If you are a Zionist who lives on stolen Arab land, you really don't have any business whining to me when they try to kill you for it.

You stole their land. That's what they are pissed about. Not that your sky pixie is nicer than their sky pixie.

I will ask again when did it become arab muslim land. They ceased to own it legally back in 1099 when they were evicted. Then along comes WW1 when the Ottomans were soundly thrashed and lost legal ownership of the lands in the M.E. Because the mufti enlisted his people to fight for the Ottomans they lost any legal rights they had to the land in 1917. So when did the Ottomans or LoN grant the arab muslims any form of legal sovereingty over the land. Following international laws of the time the LoN granted the Jews the rights to the land left over after the partition in 1923 into arab muslim trans Jordan and Jewish national home.

Once again you use the LIES spread by the hate sites to try and disinherit the Jews from their legal rights and ownership of a paltry 22% of palestine.

 

[Phoenall]

The "Zionist Entity" is code for "******* Jews". Israel has a right to exist, get over it.

No the "Zionist Entity" is code for "A place that practices religious apartheid where colonists oppress the indigenous people".

The Zionist Entity is the last vestige of colonialism and imperialism. The world will not miss it when it is driven into the sea.

Then you are saying that every islamonazi and neo marxist nation is a Zionist entity, stealing even more of the little the Jews have left. Or are you just parroting the terms used on the hate sites because it meets with your anti semitism and nazi racism

The indigenous people were the Jews until 1923 when the arab muslims illegally migrated in force to over run the Jews.

 

[JoeB131]

Correct in this case it was to collapse underground tunnels, which were and are a valid legal military target.

The land was, the canal wasnt. And the rightful owners could have destroyed it and told Egypt to get on with living of the proceeds.

Your predeliction for using hate sites is showing again as they are the places that push the RACIST ANTI SEMITIC phrase "Zionist entity "

Uh, guy, the British had more to lose closing the canal than Egypt did at the time. And that's the problem with Colonialism in general. Taking shit from people that is rightfully theirs and then wondering why they are upset about it.

The Zionist Entity is the last, sad gasp of Colonialism, and we'll all be better off for the end of it when we celebrate Indigenous People's Day.

Translation: You're right, DW. I hate ******* Jews.

Thanks for your input, Joey.

I don't hate Jews any more or less than I despise any other worshiper of malignant imaginary sky fairies.

It's what you do that generally makes me hate you. The Zionists don't care if they pull the whole world into flames.

The reason why we saved the Zionist Entity in 1973 (when we stayed out of past wars) was because Golda Meier threatened to nuke the world if she lost the war. That's all kinds of fucked up, having your safety threatened by religious nuts.

 

[JoeB131]

I will ask again when did it become arab muslim land.

I've answered that many times... next.

 

[Divine Wind]

...I don't hate Jews any more or less than I despise any other worshiper of malignant imaginary sky fairies.

It's what you do that generally makes me hate you.....

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[RoccoR]

JoeB131, et al,

I'm a bit confused here. Help me out.

If you are a Zionist who lives on stolen Arab land, you really don't have any business whining to me when they try to kill you for it.

You stole their land. That's what they are pissed about. Not that your sky pixie is nicer than their sky pixie.

(QUESTIONS & CONSIDERATIONS)

• What is the definition of a Zionist in this context?
•• What time period are you applying that terms?
••• Did Zionism evolve ---> drifting toward Revisionism?
•••• Did Zionism - Revisionism and Renaissance of the Jewish Religion converge between the 1948-49 War and the 1973 War?
••••• Was the renewed militaristic views of the of Revisionism driven by the new disastrous outcome of the 1973 War?
​

(COMMENT)

Whether you attempt to criminalize the the process by which the Jewish People came into the possession of (the territory now known as) Israel, --- or --- politicize the acquisition in terms of the Customary processes of the victors over the defeated, really makes little difference of today. In the last decades of the 19th Century and the early decades of the 20th Century --- the victorious Allied Powers considered such processes radically different then (over a 100 years ago) much differently than the the views held in the post-War 1949 era, the five year period immediately following the 1967 Six-Day War, --- or --- the period of time marked by distinctive character left in the wake of the 1973 Yom Kipper War, when Israel was the victim of a surprise attack on the Syrian Front and the Egyptian Third Army on the Sinai Front. While the end-game was a decisive victory for the Israelis, it was a close call. Israel learned the very important need to maintain their War Ready Reserve and pre-positioned War Stocks. In that frame, you see a kind of enlightenment in the general Israeli Population and the sweat of fear that Israel can never let its guard down. Now, more than ever, the militaristic character of Zionist Revisionism began to bloom; never trusting again and taking what steps necessary to fortify and built an active defense; as well as being prepared to take preemptive steps in order to protect the Jewish National Home. Some observers to the impact from the assault executed by Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and a smaller 3-country North African contingent, saw a kind of reactionary Zionism push strongly toward militarism to protect the "dream of a cultural homes."

Zionism evolves, very much like that of post-War American Foreign Policy; after WWII; and right up to the present day when Americans are beginning to question whether US intervention should ever be applied to disintegrating Arab failed states.

The Zionism of the early 20th Century WWI era, the Zionism if 1945 post-Holocaust era, the Zionism of the post-War 1948/49, and the Zionism in the aftermath of the 1973 Yom Kipper War, all have had an impact on what Zionism means. In fact, even today, the Israelis are quietly --- yet earnestly --- discussing what it means to be a Zionist in Israel today.

For me, it is to the point that I just don't use the word, and nearly ignore every commentary that uses the term without as description and period.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hossfly]

Yes if they are used for military/terrorist purposes, it is all in the Geneva conventions if you bother to look

which wasn't the case here. This was a case of the Zionists terrorizing civilians...

Israel Is Our Shield
The Jewish Homeland was set up by the British as a decoy to the inevitable next jihad. At that long-lost time, the ruling classes knew their history. But then, after World War II, the pro-Arab appeasement class took over again and tried to crush the independent Jewish state.

In 1956, equally ignorant President Eisenhower took the side of the Muslims in their seizure of the Suez Canal, betraying Israel, England, and France (which had built it, not the primitive Muslims).

In 1967, LBJ played both sides and passed on intelligence about Israeli movements in order to limit their victory in the Six-Day War. So that whole rotten century promoted ignorance about Nazislamis, which led directly to 9/11 and the continued invitation to sleeper cells to enter America and have their way.

actually, Ike had it right. 99% of our problems in that region are because we prop up the Zionist Entity. Oh, yeah, and the Suez Canal was rightfully Egypt's property.

**** 'em if they can't take a joke.

 

[Phoenall]

Correct in this case it was to collapse underground tunnels, which were and are a valid legal military target.

The land was, the canal wasnt. And the rightful owners could have destroyed it and told Egypt to get on with living of the proceeds.

Your predeliction for using hate sites is showing again as they are the places that push the RACIST ANTI SEMITIC phrase "Zionist entity "

Uh, guy, the British had more to lose closing the canal than Egypt did at the time. And that's the problem with Colonialism in general. Taking shit from people that is rightfully theirs and then wondering why they are upset about it.

The Zionist Entity is the last, sad gasp of Colonialism, and we'll all be better off for the end of it when we celebrate Indigenous People's Day.

Translation: You're right, DW. I hate ******* Jews.

Thanks for your input, Joey.

I don't hate Jews any more or less than I despise any other worshiper of malignant imaginary sky fairies.

It's what you do that generally makes me hate you. The Zionists don't care if they pull the whole world into flames.

The reason why we saved the Zionist Entity in 1973 (when we stayed out of past wars) was because Golda Meier threatened to nuke the world if she lost the war. That's all kinds of fucked up, having your safety threatened by religious nuts.

There was a treaty in place that allowed the British to fund the building of the canal and run it for a number of years to recoup the costs. The arab muslims became greedy and so tore up the treaty and took over. The British should have destroyed the canal and as much of Egypt as they could before leaving.

Here you go again with the buzzwords from the hate sites, because you have nothing to support your claims other than Jew hatred.

You just hate all Jews because it is what you have been brainwashed to do.

You have these fantasy zionists confused with the islamonazi's who are the ones that would nuke the world

How about a link that can be verified as true to support your claim ? Or will you ignore this request

 

[Phoenall]

I will ask again when did it become arab muslim land.

I've answered that many times... next.

No you havent, all you have done is repeat the same words without ever producing any evidence.

If the Ottomans refused them the right to own the land and the LoN refused them the right to own the land how did it become arab muslim. As in international law forbids the arab muslims from acquiring land by force after 1949 yet they invaded Yugoslavia and took the land by force. JUST AS THEY DID IN PALESTINE

 

[JoeB131]

I'm a bit confused here. Help me out.

After reading your screed, I really can't help you.

This isn't ******* complicated

Arabs lived on that land. Jews from Europe stole it.

The Arabs want it back.

Claiming you own it because you share a religion with the people who had it 3000 years ago isn't an excuse.

 

[JoeB131]

No you havent, all you have done is repeat the same words without ever producing any evidence.

If the Ottomans refused them the right to own the land and the LoN refused them the right to own the land how did it become arab muslim. As in international law forbids the arab muslims from acquiring land by force after 1949 yet they invaded Yugoslavia and took the land by force. JUST AS THEY DID IN PALESTINE

Again. THe Ottomans, the League of Nations nor anyone else had the right to give away someone else's land.

I'm not even sure what you are babbling about with Yugoslavia.

 

[Hossfly]

Oh no, another mention of Rachel Corrie. Every time an anti-Semite brings up Rachel Corrie who was playing tag with a bulldozer which was attempting to dig up the landscaping in front of a house suspected of hiding a tunnel underneath to smuggle arms, I do not expect them to bring up the armed terrorists who were hiding in the offices of the group Rachel Corrie belonged to. I guess only Rachel Corrie counts and not the people who were murdered and terribly wounded by these terrorists.

If you are a Zionist who lives on stolen Arab land, you really don't have any business whining to me when they try to kill you for it.

You stole their land. That's what they are pissed about. Not that your sky pixie is nicer than their sky pixie.

So, Joe, if an Apache tries to kill you because you live on his land, it is quite OK with you? Meanwhile, the Arabs weren't even in the Palestine area years ago. Historically they are recent newcomers.

A Tour and Census of Palestine Year 1695: No sign of Arabian names or “Palestinians”

 

[JoeB131]

So, Joe, if an Apache tries to kill you because you live on his land, it is quite OK with you? Meanwhile, the Arabs weren't even in the Palestine area years ago. Historically they are recent newcomers.

Uh, no, they aren't. Palestine was not barren of people before the Zionists got their, no matter how much Jewish propaganda there is to the contrary.

(Oh, I live in Illinois, where the Illini Nation was completely exterminated... not something to be proud of.)

 

[Shusha]

JoeB131

You do apply your conditions equally, yes? As opposed to just against Zionists (read: Jews), right? I mean, it doesn't really matter where they were from if they stole the land?

So how would you sort this mess out? Given that there WERE both Jewish people and Arab people living on the land for thousands of years.

 

[RoccoR]

JoeB131, et al,

I did not say that at all. The issue of land theft is a fools concept. Article 16 of the Treaty of Lausanne was written in the early 20th Century by rulers that were educated by 19th Century Customary Law:

The concept of state territory composed of land as principal and sea as accessory, as well as the concept of territorial title as facts justifying an acquisition of territory, were developed in the 18th and the early 19th centuries in Europe. State territory in the case of a newly established state, justified by the theory of state recognition, was completely distinguished from the territory defined by the concept of territorial title. The theory of territorial title that asserts five modes of acquiring territory, such as occupation, accretion, cession, subjugation (conquest), and prescription, was elaborated in the latter half of the 19th century and in the beginning of the 20th century, following private law patterns.
SOURCE: INTERNATIONAL LAW
Territorial Title
Masaharu Yanagihara
​

In the colonial conquests (the particular case of the protectorate apart), the local population was ignored and the territory reduced by a fiction to the status of res nullius, this artifice enabling the western powers to act as though affirming a new sovereignty.

Although the traditional view (prior to the conclusion of post-WWI activities) of the discipline downplays the importance of the confrontation with the defeated military opponents as a whole. It is clear that much of the international law of the nineteenth century was preoccupied with colonial problems. It is explicitly recognized that special doctrines and norms, for instance when listing “conquest” and “cession by treaty” among the modes of acquiring territory. Article 16 of the Treaty of Lausanne (renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories) is one such example of the period, but -- by far -- not the only of the period. One such example still in play today is the outcome in the Treaty of Paris (10 December 1898), wherein Spain renounced all claim to Cuba, ceded Guam (“unincorporated territory of the United States" --- which by treaty the “political and civil rights of the native inhabitants will be determined by Congress”) and Puerto Rico (also an "unincorporated territory of the United States"): Additionally treaty transferred sovereignty over the Philippines to the United States for $20 million. When the Japanese invaded the Philippine Islands, they invaded US Sovereign Territory.

I'm a bit confused here. Help me out.

After reading your screed, I really can't help you.

This isn't ******* complicated

Arabs lived on that land. Jews from Europe stole it.

The Arabs want it back.

Claiming you own it because you share a religion with the people who had it 3000 years ago isn't an excuse.

(COMMENT)

It doesn't matter where the immigrants come from, although that just adds spice to the cuisine.

In the latter part of the 19th Century and the early part of the 20th Century, the leadership of the worlds great powers understood that to the victor goes the spoils. When a victory was declared, the treaty made the determination. The Arab Palestinians did not have any special rights to Sovereignty transferred from Ottoman/Turks to the Allied Powers --- any more than --- the Pilipino's had over their Sovereignty transferred from Spain to the US.

You simply cannot apply late 20th Century and early 21st Century Law and concepts retroactively to events revolving around WWI. And even late 20th Century and early 21st Century Law, is questionable as customary. Certainly, it did not apply to Jordan with the West Bank, China with Tibet or Russia with the Crimea.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hossfly]

So, Joe, if an Apache tries to kill you because you live on his land, it is quite OK with you? Meanwhile, the Arabs weren't even in the Palestine area years ago. Historically they are recent newcomers.

Uh, no, they aren't. Palestine was not barren of people before the Zionists got their, no matter how much Jewish propaganda there is to the contrary.

(Oh, I live in Illinois, where the Illini Nation was completely exterminated... not something to be proud of.)

Let's say Joe lives in Montana now, and a Cheyene murders him. Should we all send condolences or cheer on the Cheyene the way it is obvious that Joe has no problem with Israelis being murdered.

Were you there then to see whether the land was populated or not? There were others besides Mark Twin who also traveled there and came to the same conclusion. Was this all propaganda? Out of curiosity since it appears that you are always whining about the Israelis. Have you consistently gone to the Asia forum and whined about the Chinese occupying Tibet? If not, why not? You seem to only have occupation on your mind.

 

[montelatici]

Oh no, another mention of Rachel Corrie. Every time an anti-Semite brings up Rachel Corrie who was playing tag with a bulldozer which was attempting to dig up the landscaping in front of a house suspected of hiding a tunnel underneath to smuggle arms, I do not expect them to bring up the armed terrorists who were hiding in the offices of the group Rachel Corrie belonged to. I guess only Rachel Corrie counts and not the people who were murdered and terribly wounded by these terrorists.

If you are a Zionist who lives on stolen Arab land, you really don't have any business whining to me when they try to kill you for it.

You stole their land. That's what they are pissed about. Not that your sky pixie is nicer than their sky pixie.

So, Joe, if an Apache tries to kill you because you live on his land, it is quite OK with you? Meanwhile, the Arabs weren't even in the Palestine area years ago. Historically they are recent newcomers.

A Tour and Census of Palestine Year 1695: No sign of Arabian names or “Palestinians”

Posting propaganda isn't going to convince anyone. The Palestinians, whatever religion they practiced through the ages are the original inhabitants of Palestine as you well know. The author even states:

"The book was written in Latin. In 1695 he was sent on a sightseeing tour to Israel, at that time known as Palestina." Big difference between Palestine and Palestina. And, there was no Israel at the time.

You don't even read the crap propaganda.

By the way Palestine (Felastin in Ottoman Turkish) was common in 1332, the date of this map. The name places in Turkish and Arabic will reflect the Turkish and Arabic languages, not those of a European with an agenda.

"The first map in this collection was published in Filastin Risalesi, an official publication of the Ottoman army intended to be used as an officer’s manual for the Palestine region. The manual itself is a social, topographical, demographic and economic survey of Palestine circa its time of publication, 1331 (Rumi).[2] It is actually a quite unremarkable work, and resembles much of the ‘geographical’ literature published in both Ottoman and Arabic in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The map itself, just as the rest of the book, is published in Ottoman Turkish, and includes both topographical features, such as rivers and mountains (the darker the color, the higher the altitude), as well as all of the major towns and cities."

Afternoon Map: Ottoman and Arab Maps of Palestine, 1880s-1910s

 

[Hollie]

Oh no, another mention of Rachel Corrie. Every time an anti-Semite brings up Rachel Corrie who was playing tag with a bulldozer which was attempting to dig up the landscaping in front of a house suspected of hiding a tunnel underneath to smuggle arms, I do not expect them to bring up the armed terrorists who were hiding in the offices of the group Rachel Corrie belonged to. I guess only Rachel Corrie counts and not the people who were murdered and terribly wounded by these terrorists.

If you are a Zionist who lives on stolen Arab land, you really don't have any business whining to me when they try to kill you for it.

You stole their land. That's what they are pissed about. Not that your sky pixie is nicer than their sky pixie.

So, Joe, if an Apache tries to kill you because you live on his land, it is quite OK with you? Meanwhile, the Arabs weren't even in the Palestine area years ago. Historically they are recent newcomers.

A Tour and Census of Palestine Year 1695: No sign of Arabian names or “Palestinians”

Posting propaganda isn't going to convince anyone. The Palestinians, whatever religion they practiced through the ages are the original inhabitants of Palestine as you well know. The author even states:

"The book was written in Latin. In 1695 he was sent on a sightseeing tour to Israel, at that time known as Palestina." Big difference between Palestine and Palestina. And, there was no Israel at the time.

You don't even read the crap propaganda.

By the way Palestine (Felastin in Ottoman Turkish) was common in 1332, the date of this map. The name places in Turkish and Arabic will reflect the Turkish and Arabic languages, not those of a European with an agenda.

"The first map in this collection was published in Filastin Risalesi, an official publication of the Ottoman army intended to be used as an officer’s manual for the Palestine region. The manual itself is a social, topographical, demographic and economic survey of Palestine circa its time of publication, 1331 (Rumi).[2] It is actually a quite unremarkable work, and resembles much of the ‘geographical’ literature published in both Ottoman and Arabic in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The map itself, just as the rest of the book, is published in Ottoman Turkish, and includes both topographical features, such as rivers and mountains (the darker the color, the higher the altitude), as well as all of the major towns and cities."

Afternoon Map: Ottoman and Arab Maps of Palestine, 1880s-1910s

Sorry, dear. That's the same map you have cut and pasted multiple times across multiple threads. "Palestine" was a geographic area.

You suffer from the same ignorance that afflicts another in these forums when you try to represent "Pal'istan" as something it was not.