Palestians Observed Sabbath
Shabatai Abusnieneh
Shabatai Abusnieneh wrote:
>
> Confrontations Renewed in Kalandia & Ras el-Amoud
> Israeli Made Several Arrests
>
> Jerusalem, Wafa
> A 13 year old Palestinian suffered an injury to the foot after he was
> shot by a metallic rubber-coated bullet yesterday in Jerusalem. Israeli
> soldiers used [specially formulated] tear gas and metallic rubber-coated
> bullets to disburse Palestinian protesters near Ras el-Amoud and all
> over Arab Jerusalem. Israeli press sources said that Israeli police made
> some arrests.
>
> The Israeli police have erected two check posts around the house in Ras
> el-Amoud. The posts prohibited all private and public vehicles from
> entering the area except those related to the settlers and trucks
> shipping construction materials to the site.
>
> Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
> nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their houses.
> Yesterday, the Israeli soldiers closed the street under the claim of the
> beginning of the Sabbath. Eight Palestinian families have submitted
> complaints to the Israeli Supreme court that the new house is causing a
> threat to their existence and public peace. The families are concerned
> that the new house will eventually become a settlement spot for
> fundamentalists like those of Tal Er-rmeideh in Hebron and "Joseph
> Grave" in Nablus.
>
> In Kalandia Refugee Camp, protests continued for the second day against
> the new settlement in Ras el-Amoud. Protesters closed the streets and
> threw rocks and bottles on Israeli soldiers. Soldiers replied with live
> ammunition, metallic rubber-coated bullets, and [specially formulated]
> tear gas. There was no report of any injury till late night.
>
> Translated by Shabatai Zvi
> Alayyam
> by:N AlAmer
> Sep. 21, 1997
> How Can You Help?
>
> Please write/call/fax...
>
> Israeli P.M. Benjamin Netanyahu:
> Fax: +972-2-566 4838
> email: mailto:p...@pmo.gov.il
>
> Israeli Foreign Minister David Levy:
>
> Fax: +972-2-530 3506
> email: mailto:a...@israel-info.gov.il
>
> Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Mordechai:
> Fax: +972-3-691 6940
>
> Israeli Government Press Office:
> email: mailto:g...@pmo.gov.il
> Israeli Mayor of Jerusalem, Ehud Olmert:
> Fax: +972-2-629 6014
> --
> Shabatai Zvi, (HIPRS) Chicago, IL, USA. http://www.hebron.com
Who is next?
Shabatai Abusnieneh
Roger Froikin
Shabatai Abusnieneh wrote:
> Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
> nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their
> houses.
The solution is simple.
Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
elsewhere.
Grigori Khaskin
Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
: Confrontations Renewed in Kalandia & Ras el-Amoud
: Israeli Made Several Arrests
: Jerusalem, Wafa
: A 13 year old Palestinian suffered an injury to the foot after he was
: shot by a metallic rubber-coated bullet yesterday in Jerusalem. Israeli
: soldiers used [specially formulated] tear gas and metallic rubber-coated
Would you, or your secret arab sources, please clarify the term [specially
formulated]. It is really intriguing. Does it action gender dependent, or
based on secret genetic research, or just have some pyretrum added?
Sincerely,
G.K.
Shabatai Abusnieneh
Dear Mr. Froikin
This is called Ras el-Amoud. It is not Jerusalem. First you need to find
where (your) Jerusalem is then you can take it. Your holiest book, the
Talmud states that there were two cities called Jerusalem. The text is
following, but before you read it; do not argue that the Talmud is the
holiest book because I have the evidence:-
Talmud - Mas. Arachin 32b
"There were two [different cities called] Kadesh? Thus also were there
two [cities called] Jerusalem.4"
Shabatai Abusnieneh
Grigori Khaskin wrote:
>
> Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
> : Roger Froikin wrote:
> : >
> : > Shabatai Abusnieneh wrote:
> : >
> : > > Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
> : > > nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their
> : > > houses.
> : >
> : > The solution is simple.
> : >
> : > Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
> : > elsewhere.
>
> : Dear Mr. Froikin
> : This is called Ras el-Amoud. It is not Jerusalem.
>
>
> <bull deleted>
I brought the evidence from your holy books that there were 2
Jerusalems. You call that BS? I do the same thing. You will eventually
get out of there. Remember that Palestine was the subject of the
Crusader campaigns for almost 200 years. It remained the undivided
Muslim Arab Palestine. And so will it remain against the nose of all the
colonialists and imperialists.
Grigori Khaskin
Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:: > : Confrontations Renewed in Kalandia & Ras el-Amoud
: It seems that you forget that when you went to high school that when you
: encounter text between [], it means that the text is an addition from
: the poster/ author. In this case, it was me who added the text because
: the original translated text does not have it. This is callled
: "objectivity."
: Why did I add it? Very simple my friend.
#1. I am not your friend
#2. Usually additions are initialed.
#3. Such a knowledgable person as you must provide a formula.
#4. What about pyretrum?
: Till the beginning of the 1980s... probably 1981-2; Israeli soldiers
: were using some tear gas that never caused death or permanent
: impairments. People used 'onion juice' to get rid of the effect of the
: gas. In few minutes, the effect of the gas disappeared. Sometimes in
: 1982, Israel started to use tear gas that cannot be cured by simple
: 'onion juice.' Medical attention was required in certain cases. In my
: personal case, I was in coma for about 2 hours in 1983 when I attempted
: to pick up the bomb and threw it back at the soldiers.
I must admit I am crying loud now.
Till then, there
: were no reports of any death or permanent injuries from tear gas.
: When the Intifada started in 1988, people, suddenly, started to feel
: different effect of Israeli tear gas. Several people died and dozens of
: pregnant women aborted as a result.
: So, as you can see, the tear gas that was curable by simple 'onion
: juice' was developed to a fatal weapon that caused suffocation and
: abortion cases. There has been at least one case that I am aware of a
: permanent brain damage during the Intifada.
I can't believe you go public yourself!
: That is why I personally call it [special formulated] because I assume
: that the Israeli genius planted its ideology into tear gas.
Names, formulas, LD-50, and quantities per cm(3) please.
(Side questions - How much of ideology you need for example to prodece
nitrogene analog of iprit, please, what part of ideology are most readily
could be transfered to chemicals? Does it mean that in order to succeed
in his chemical farfare ASSad and Saddam must embrace judaizm, etc.?)
: BTW. Tear gas is not the only [special formulated] stuff that Israel
: produced to Arabs. You might be interested in this recent article from
: the Washington Post of how the Israelis add sex hormones in gum that
: they sell to Arabs which cause female infertility. You can read the
: article at:
: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/mideast/july/28/gum2807.htm
The last is hillarious and bogus together. That stupidity made my day.
No more crying, just ROTFL.
Hold on testosteron when post, abubu.
G.K.
Roger Alexander
Roger Froikin wrote:
> Shabatai Abusnieneh wrote:
>
> > Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
> > nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their
> > houses.
>
> The solution is simple.
>
> Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
> elsewhere.
Racist, bigoted post, like others from this poster.
RogerAlexander
Grigori Khaskin
Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
: Roger Froikin wrote:
: >
: > Shabatai Abusnieneh wrote:
: >
: > > Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
: > > nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their
: > > houses.
: >
: > The solution is simple.
: >
: > Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
: > elsewhere.
Shabatai Abusnieneh
Grigori Khaskin wrote:
>
> Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
> : Confrontations Renewed in Kalandia & Ras el-Amoud
> : Israeli Made Several Arrests
>
> : Jerusalem, Wafa
> : A 13 year old Palestinian suffered an injury to the foot after he was
> : shot by a metallic rubber-coated bullet yesterday in Jerusalem. Israeli
> : soldiers used [specially formulated] tear gas and metallic rubber-coated
>
> Would you, or your secret arab sources, please clarify the term [specially
> formulated]. It is really intriguing. Does it action gender dependent, or
> based on secret genetic research, or just have some pyretrum added?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> G.K.
It seems that you forget that when you went to high school that when you
encounter text between [], it means that the text is an addition from
the poster/ author. In this case, it was me who added the text because
the original translated text does not have it. This is callled
"objectivity."
Why did I add it? Very simple my friend.
Till the beginning of the 1980s... probably 1981-2; Israeli soldiers
were using some tear gas that never caused death or permanent
impairments. People used 'onion juice' to get rid of the effect of the
gas. In few minutes, the effect of the gas disappeared. Sometimes in
1982, Israel started to use tear gas that cannot be cured by simple
'onion juice.' Medical attention was required in certain cases. In my
personal case, I was in coma for about 2 hours in 1983 when I attempted
to pick up the bomb and threw it back at the soldiers. Till then, there
were no reports of any death or permanent injuries from tear gas.
When the Intifada started in 1988, people, suddenly, started to feel
different effect of Israeli tear gas. Several people died and dozens of
pregnant women aborted as a result.
So, as you can see, the tear gas that was curable by simple 'onion
juice' was developed to a fatal weapon that caused suffocation and
abortion cases. There has been at least one case that I am aware of a
permanent brain damage during the Intifada.
That is why I personally call it [special formulated] because I assume
that the Israeli genius planted its ideology into tear gas.
BTW. Tear gas is not the only [special formulated] stuff that Israel
produced to Arabs. You might be interested in this recent article from
the Washington Post of how the Israelis add sex hormones in gum that
they sell to Arabs which cause female infertility. You can read the
article at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/mideast/july/28/gum2807.htm
--
Shabatai Abusnieneh
> : >
> : > Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
> : > : Confrontations Renewed in Kalandia & Ras el-Amoud
> : > : Israeli Made Several Arrests
> : >
> : > : Jerusalem, Wafa
> : > : A 13 year old Palestinian suffered an injury to the foot after he was
> : > : shot by a metallic rubber-coated bullet yesterday in Jerusalem. Israeli
> : > : soldiers used [specially formulated] tear gas and metallic rubber-coated
> : >
> : > Would you, or your secret arab sources, please clarify the term [specially
> : > formulated]. It is really intriguing. Does it action gender dependent, or
> : > based on secret genetic research, or just have some pyretrum added?
> : >
> : > Sincerely,
> : >
> : > G.K.
>
> : It seems that you forget that when you went to high school that when you
> : encounter text between [], it means that the text is an addition from
> : the poster/ author. In this case, it was me who added the text because
> : the original translated text does not have it. This is callled
> : "objectivity."
> : Why did I add it? Very simple my friend.
>
> #2. Usually additions are initialed.
> #3. Such a knowledgable person as you must provide a formula.
> #4. What about pyretrum?
>
> : were using some tear gas that never caused death or permanent
> : impairments. People used 'onion juice' to get rid of the effect of the
> : gas. In few minutes, the effect of the gas disappeared. Sometimes in
> : 1982, Israel started to use tear gas that cannot be cured by simple
> : 'onion juice.' Medical attention was required in certain cases. In my
> : personal case, I was in coma for about 2 hours in 1983 when I attempted
> : to pick up the bomb and threw it back at the soldiers.
>
>
> : were no reports of any death or permanent injuries from tear gas.
> : When the Intifada started in 1988, people, suddenly, started to feel
> : different effect of Israeli tear gas. Several people died and dozens of
> : pregnant women aborted as a result.
> : So, as you can see, the tear gas that was curable by simple 'onion
> : juice' was developed to a fatal weapon that caused suffocation and
> : abortion cases. There has been at least one case that I am aware of a
> : permanent brain damage during the Intifada.
>
>
> : that the Israeli genius planted its ideology into tear gas.
>
>
> (Side questions - How much of ideology you need for example to prodece
> nitrogene analog of iprit, please, what part of ideology are most readily
> could be transfered to chemicals? Does it mean that in order to succeed
> in his chemical farfare ASSad and Saddam must embrace judaizm, etc.?)
>
> : produced to Arabs. You might be interested in this recent article from
> : the Washington Post of how the Israelis add sex hormones in gum that
> : they sell to Arabs which cause female infertility. You can read the
> : article at:
> : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/mideast/july/28/gum2807.htm
>
> No more crying, just ROTFL.
>
> Hold on testosteron when post, abubu.
>
> G.K.
That is exactly what Hitler was saying. But Israel is using same or
similar tool like those Nazi used. A brief visit to the web site of the
Israeli Human Right Commission http://www.btselem.org will till you that
the Civil Administrative law and other torture tools that Israel uses
against our people are typical.
Hey:- I know I cannot be your friend!
Shabatai Abusnieneh
Grigori Khaskin wrote:
>
> Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
> : Grigori Khaskin wrote:
> : >
> : > Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
> : Jerusalems. You call that BS? I do the same thing. You will eventually
> : get out of there. Remember that Palestine was the subject of the
> : Crusader campaigns for almost 200 years. It remained the undivided
> : Muslim Arab Palestine. And so will it remain against the nose of all the
> : colonialists and imperialists.
>
> And Mount of olives is part of our eternal capital founded by King David
> 3000 years ago. BS is your "undivided Muslim Arab Palestine". If 3000
> years was not enough for Filistines, than Greeks/Syrians, Rome,
> Christianity, and Islam to wipe out jews there, your so-called
> "palestinians" and all they allies will not succeed. Better
> share your Chicago home with your friends who ready get out from the
> stolen ancient jewish land.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> G.K.
A lot of people think that Kadesh is the Petra [look it up in the
Talmud.] If this is true, you can consider Petra and Kadesh {Talmud says
that there were two Kadesh(s)-- Torah mentions several Kedesh(s)} then
you hallucination may lead you to consider Petra, going down to Mecca,
and Yemen as part of Israel. And surprisingly, the Two Kadeshs that the
Talmud spoke about and the many Kedeshs that the Torah spoke about and
the fact that not a single Jewish historian pinpointed to the locations
of the 2 Jerusalem(s), 2 Kadesh(s), and many Kedesh(s) deserves some
attentions.
Grigori Khaskin
Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
: Grigori Khaskin wrote:
: >
: > Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
blah, blah, blah......
Here you medicine in reverse:"A lot of people think that your first
second, third and so-on Al-Quds are indeed Medina, Mecca, Jedda, Paris"
Happy now?
G.K.
Grigori Khaskin
Jack Garbuz
>Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
>nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their houses.
>beginning of the Sabbath. Eight Palestinian families have submitted
>complaints to the Israeli Supreme court that the new house is causing a
>threat to their existence and public peace. The families are concerned
>that the new house will eventually become a settlement spot for
>fundamentalists like those of Tal Er-rmeideh in Hebron and "Joseph
>Grave" in Nablus.>
Get used to it. Jews will resettle every inch of our country period.
>In Kalandia Refugee Camp, protests continued for the second day against
>the new settlement in Ras el-Amoud. Protesters closed the streets and
>threw rocks and bottles on Israeli soldiers. Soldiers replied with live
>ammunition, metallic rubber-coated bullets, and [specially formulated]
>tear gas. There was no report of any injury till late night. <
They should move the whole so-called refugee camp east to Jordan if the
sight of Jews bothers them so much. That is where they belong anyway.
Shabatai Abusnieneh
I have no doubt that you intend to settle every inch of Palestine. But
you have to prove that it is your country not to the 1.2 billion Muslims
who claim it, but to the 5 million Palestinians who have been displaced
by your 'settlement.' I realize that you have the power to do anything
you want. Historically many people had the same power and you know one
of them, Hitler. But power does not constitute legitimacy in the long
run because there is no guarantee at all that Israel will be able to
monopolize the power balance in the region for eternity.
As far as resettling these refugees elsewhere, this is not up to you.
You came from Poland to dictate on us what to do and not to do? Do not
you think that this is the farce of history.
God promised this land to the 'Israelites' who are a deceased race now.
He did not promise it to Moskowitz & Co. And in anyway, your Torah was
described by the Talmud as a book with 'negative precepts.' You know
what that means and you know that the Talmud has a priority over the
Torah as evident from scripts from the Talmud itself. So, why do not you
go and find the other Jerusalem that the Talmud spoke about. You realize
that you were given 2 chances to locate your temple in 331 by Emperor
Julian and you know what happened then.
Jack Garbuz
>> Get used to it. Jews will resettle every inch of our country period.
>>
>you have to prove that it is your country not to the 1.2 billion Muslims
>who claim it, but to the 5 million Palestinians who have been displaced
>by your 'settlement.' I realize that you have the power to do anything
>you want. Historically many people had the same power and you know one
>of them, Hitler. But power does not constitute legitimacy in the long
>run because there is no guarantee at all that Israel will be able to
>monopolize the power balance in the region for eternity.>
Yes, to fight 1.2 billion Moslems for our land is no easy swim up river,
but to our land we shall swim regardless of all odds, as has been the
case all along. Hitler left his homeland to occupy lands not his. So did
your people when they occupied ours. And it is not Israel, but God's
will that will monopolize the power balance; we are only the recipients
of His grace.
>As far as resettling these refugees elsewhere, this is not up to you.
>You came from Poland to dictate on us what to do and not to do? Do not
>you think that this is the farce of history.>
See the new documentary "Long Way Home." We didn't come from Poland; we
were uprooted from a land that didn't want us anyway, so some of us made
it home. Others will come home when the time is ripe.
>God promised this land to the 'Israelites' who are a deceased race now.
>He did not promise it to Moskowitz & Co.<
Is God a liar? He promised the land to us unto the end of times. You can
try to rewrite our Book as your prophet did, but the truth will be borne
out either way. And He also wrote in Genesis" "And Canaan shall be
cursed.." so if you try to identify with Canaan (which you are not) you
only bring upon yourself His curse. You are Ishmaelites living on
Isaac's land, so be good, quiet half brothers and learn to live in peace.
Or else the curse will never end.
> And in anyway, your Torah was
>described by the Talmud as a book with 'negative precepts.' You know
>what that means and you know that the Talmud has a priority over the
>Torah as evident from scripts from the Talmud itself. So, why do not you
>go and find the other Jerusalem that the Talmud spoke about. You realize
>that you were given 2 chances to locate your temple in 331 by Emperor
>Julian and you know what happened then.<
I have no idea what you are talking about. I had very wealthy relatives
before the war who called Vienna their Jerusalem. Well, that went up in
smoke; or I should say they did. There are some who think New York is
their Jerusalem. But we have one Jerusalem and we intend to keep all of
it for ourselves.
Roger Alexander
Jack Garbuz wrote:
> >Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
> >nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their houses.
> >Yesterday, the Israeli soldiers closed the street under the claim of the
> >beginning of the Sabbath. Eight Palestinian families have submitted
> >complaints to the Israeli Supreme court that the new house is causing a
> >threat to their existence and public peace. The families are concerned
> >that the new house will eventually become a settlement spot for
> >fundamentalists like those of Tal Er-rmeideh in Hebron and "Joseph
> >Grave" in Nablus.>
>
> Get used to it. Jews will resettle every inch of our country period.
>
> >In Kalandia Refugee Camp, protests continued for the second day against
> >the new settlement in Ras el-Amoud. Protesters closed the streets and
> >threw rocks and bottles on Israeli soldiers. Soldiers replied with live
> >ammunition, metallic rubber-coated bullets, and [specially formulated]
> >tear gas. There was no report of any injury till late night. <
>
> They should move the whole so-called refugee camp east to Jordan if the
> sight of Jews bothers them so much. That is where they belong anyway.
No racist infection in Garbuz's posts, can't infect yourself.
Roger Alexander
Headers cut to reasonable groups. RLA
Shabatai Abusneinehh
Varactacap wrote:
>
> Shabatai Wrote:
> >
> >
> >Dear Mr. Froikin
> >where (your) Jerusalem is then you can take it. Your holiest book, the
> >Talmud states that there were two cities called Jerusalem. The text is
> >following, but before you read it; do not argue that the Talmud is the
> >holiest book because I have the evidence:-
> >
> >Talmud - Mas. Arachin 32b
> >"There were two [different cities called] Kadesh? Thus also were there
> >two [cities called] Jerusalem.4"
> >
> >
> say regarding this matter. From what I've read, these books are pretty dark.
>
> It amazes me just how quickly this discussion, of the lives people living
> in wherever this place is, has degenerated. All that's being discussed
> here is semantics and interpretations of ancient text. In 18 posts,
> nothing to do with the people who live in this town! Just semantics and
> folklore and hype.
>
> Where I live people clearly have their priorities straight. First peace
> and comfort, then if you want religion. No one is going to tell any of us
> that because so and so said so and so 1000 years ago, we arn't welcome
> anymore. No bullshit living. It's sweet.
>
> -Aaron
You are signing your name with a Jewish name, I will have to assume that
you are a Jew. Can you kindly express your opinion of a solution and
defend it. It is insufficient to say that this is wrong. You need to
tell us what is right from your viewpoint and, if you want to join the
discussion, you need to stand up for your views.
--
Abusuneineh
Varactacap wrote:
>
> Shabatai Zvi wrote:
> > Can you kindly express your opinion of a solution and
> >defend it.
>
> in. Only the people who live in the Middle East can really figure out how
> to envision a better future for themselves.
>
> "Envisioning a better future" is basicaly what I was getting at in the
> previous post. Also, I wasn't solely on you're case either, and in hind
> sight would have preferred to make that clear in the post.
>
> Is there anything in any of the ancient texts of the Koran, Torah, Talmud,
> or Bible that can be contrued in such a way as to promote the respect and
> consideration that underly peace? If so, I havn't heard it here in this
> discussion group.
>
> I feel it's a matter worth pointing out. Much of the string of posts
> that, followed you're original description of difficulties that are alleged
> to be taking place around a Jewish housing project, were practically
> rediculous. Somewhere in the discussion string all thought of the people
> who's lives are affected by the situation gave way to religious doctrine
> that seemed to rationalize pure thoughtlessness.
>
> /Aaron
Netanyahwitz & Co. do not want peace and half of the Israelis realize
that their Prime Minister is doing everything possible to reverse Oslo
and put the blame on the Palestinians. If you read Hebrew, then you can
read several articles in Maarive and Haaretz about that.
Since the Israeli government is working against peace, we cannot force
them to accept it. We can only speak for ourselves and the Israelis will
have to suffer the consequences of their arrogant supremacy.
As far as my postings about the Israeli settlement sewer system running
in Arab land, and some times, close to their residents, this is true. It
takes only an ignorant to deny it.
William Wallace
On 22 Sep 1997 00:10:38 GMT, kha...@sfu.ca (Grigori Khaskin) wrote:
>Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
>: Grigori Khaskin wrote:
>: >
>: > Shabatai Abusnieneh (snt...@ihoussemailx.com) wrote:
>: > : Roger Froikin wrote:
>: > : >
>: > : > Shabatai Abusnieneh wrote:
>: > : >
>: > : > > Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
>: > : > > nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their
>: > : > > houses.
>: > : >
>: > : > The solution is simple.
>: > : >
>: > : > Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
>: > : > elsewhere.
>: >
>: > : Dear Mr. Froikin
>: > : This is called Ras el-Amoud. It is not Jerusalem.
>: >
>: > It is called Mount of olives, and it is Yerushalaim..
>: >
>: > <bull deleted>
>
>
>: I brought the evidence from your holy books that there were 2
>: Jerusalems. You call that BS? I do the same thing. You will eventually
>: get out of there. Remember that Palestine was the subject of the
>: Crusader campaigns for almost 200 years. It remained the undivided
>: Muslim Arab Palestine. And so will it remain against the nose of all the
>: colonialists and imperialists.
>
>BS is your howling. I am not going to discuss with you World to come.
>And Mount of olives is part of our eternal capital founded by King David
>3000 years ago.
Of course there is no evidence there were every any kings much
less one named David. But you know that. Must less any evidence he
founded a capitol as you also know.
>BS is your "undivided Muslim Arab Palestine". If 3000
>years was not enough for Filistines, than Greeks/Syrians, Rome,
>Christianity, and Islam to wipe out jews there, your so-called
>"palestinians" and all they allies will not succeed. Better
>share your Chicago home with your friends who ready get out from the
>stolen ancient jewish land.
Given the consequences of the failure, too bad.
=====
Unlike Christians, Jews recite every real and imagined slight in the last
3600 years and then claim to be the most persecuted people in the world.
William Wallace
On Sun, 21 Sep 1997 16:46:01 -0400, Roger Froikin <efr...@rstone.com>
wrote:
>Shabatai Abusnieneh wrote:
>> Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
>> nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their
>> houses.
>The solution is simple.
>Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
>elsewhere.
Or they can shoot them. It makes no difference when they are
intent upon intenting implementing Lebensraum as a policy and are
importing Russians to make it impossible to end that policy, thus
making peace impossible.
William Wallace
On Sun, 21 Sep 1997 16:20:38 -0500, Shabatai Abusnieneh
<snt...@ihoussemailx.com> wrote:
>Roger Froikin wrote:
>>
>> Shabatai Abusnieneh wrote:
>>
>> > Life for the native residents of the neighborhood is becoming a
>> > nightmare where they have to hustle with soldiers to reach their
>> > houses.
>>
>> The solution is simple.
>>
>> Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
>> elsewhere.
>
>
>Dear Mr. Froikin
>This is called Ras el-Amoud. It is not Jerusalem. First you need to find
>where (your) Jerusalem is then you can take it. Your holiest book, the
>Talmud states that there were two cities called Jerusalem. The text is
>following, but before you read it; do not argue that the Talmud is the
>holiest book because I have the evidence:-
>
>Talmud - Mas. Arachin 32b
>"There were two [different cities called] Kadesh? Thus also were there
>two [cities called] Jerusalem.4"
More specifically, Solomon's Temple was built in the real
Jerusalem. They have no idea where that temple is to be found.
Archaeologists doubt either it or Solomon ever existed.
William Wallace
On Wed, 24 Sep 1997 09:24:19 -0500, Abusuneineh <sn...@snunu.snunu>
wrote:
As a matter of technical accuracy, that constitutes biological
terrorism.
Jack Garbuz
>>The solution is simple.
>
>>Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
>>elsewhere.
>
>intent upon intenting implementing Lebensraum as a policy and are
>importing Russians to make it impossible to end that policy, thus
>making peace impossible. >
Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
Shabatai Abusneineh
Jack Garbuz wrote:
>
> >>Talmud - Mas. Arachin 32b
> >>"There were two [different cities called] Kadesh? Thus also were there
> >>two [cities called] Jerusalem.4"
> >
> > More specifically, Solomon's Temple was built in the real
> >Jerusalem. They have no idea where that temple is to be found.
> >Archaeologists doubt either it or Solomon ever existed. >
>
> showing the loot robbed from the Temple.
Solomon is a belief, not a fact, and if the Romans have the titus, we
need to know from which Talmudic Jerusalem it came from. But saying that
the Aqsa is erected on the temple is untrue, biblically speaking,
because 1)The Talmud described 2 Jerusalem, 2) 1,300 years after the
temple was destroyed, Jews tried their luck in 331 at the time of
Emperor Julian but burned to death in two trial. Now scientists
speculate that it was 'natural gas' which (as you know) takes dozens of
thousands of years to develop.
In 1985 a historian came and claimed that the temple is located in Saudi
Arabia. But the Saudi did not let him finish his story which was
substantiated by names and archeological discoveries. Go to Arabia and
locate your temple and rebuild your illusion there. Palestine has been
inhabited by Palestinians for thousands of years. If you are looking for
a temple to rebuild, you will not find it in Palestine.
Jack Garbuz
Roger Alexander
Jack Garbuz wrote:
I have tried to approach Garbuz's posts from the POV of logical flaws.
It is hard, because there is little logic, and a lot of emotion. Let's try,
though.
Lebensraum as a notion comes from the Nazi, treated as language.
It means the notion that the Germans needed (and by implication, deserved)
living room at the expense of their neighbors (both to the East and to the
West).
It assumes that the necessitous party has the power to inflict itself on the
other.
The previous poster had asserted that Israel was following such a policy
and was creating the need by importing Russian Jews to colonize Palestine.
Garbuz ridicules this assertion, making the incredible claim that: "It is the
Arabs
who sought Lebensraum in the little Jewish country."
He adds another false assertion here as is his wont: "little Jewish
country".
The even here multiple implication is that the country was Jewish, which it
factually was not and had not been for thousands of years, if ever, and
"little"
implying that the Jewish country was small, thus defenseless in the face of
the numerous Arabs, and worthy of our sympathy and help. In fact,
one reason for choosing Palestine to colonize was the fact that the people
would
not be able to defend themselves against the incursion of the Zionists, since
the people were poor and powerless. The power relation Garbuz implies
did not exist.
But the thrust of his "argument" or more accurately quarrel is that the
Jews,
because of their numbers, are more entitled to the Land than the miniscule
palestinians. Interwoven with this is a much more complicated assertion that
the Balfour declaration gave the Jews a legal right in the Land superior to
that
of the inhabitants. The Balfour declaration did not do so, but he ignores
this.
Of course, the inhabitants were not asked their pleasure before the imperial
power temporarily governing them made such a declaration, and this destroys
any legitimacy of the declaration.
Garbuz takes all of world Jewry then extant, and compares this number to
the number of Palestinians living at home in their own land. To gain
sympathy,
he then compares the number of Palestinians then to today.
Note how in the space of two sentences he changes the basis of comparison
from
the Palestinians numbering a half million to "Arabs" who have 21 countries.
Viewing
the Arabs as a lump, he then implies that the Arabs have quite enough land,
thank you,
to absorb the Palestinians, making in passing a misidentification
between the residents of Palestine and the "Arabs". There is not now and
never has
an Arab nation. The original residents of the Arabian peninsula have a
country,
Saudi Arabia, but there are numerous others dominated by Arabs, along the
north coast
of Africa and inland.
He closes by saying that "they" don't let jews "leben", characterizing
this as the problem.
Assuming that the Arabs are the "they", there is no truth to the assertion.
He misidentifies
Israeli Jews with all Jews.
I haven't really done justice to this short post. Garbuz never lets the
truth interfere with
a good story, and he does it well.
Roger alexander
Sven Noltemeier
Shabatai Abusnieneh <snt...@ihoussemailx.com> wrote:
> But power does not constitute legitimacy in the long
>run because there is no guarantee at all that Israel will be able to
>monopolize the power balance in the region for eternity.
"monopolize the power balance", what is that ? When there is a power
balance, it takes two or more sides who have power, as is the case in
the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is either a friendly one like in the
European Union after WWII or it is an equilibrium of deterrence like
in the Cold War between USA and USSR.
Peres dreamed of the first one for the ME, but it seems that the
second alternative is more realistic (BTW it is already there for some
decades). I'm quite optimistic that Israel is more like the US and
the Arab states more like the East bloc. :-)
>As far as resettling these refugees elsewhere, this is not up to you.
It tells much about Arab morality and bigotry how they treat their
Arab brothers. Why should Israel treat them better than they treat
themselves ? Israel took Arab Jews and made them citizens (not
without probems, but there was never a question about it).
Sven
Abusnaineh
Mr. Sven
Arabs did not treat us bad. They did not want to resettle us because
that means giving up our right in/of Palestine. Palestinian refugees
will return to Palestine sooner or later. They will remain refugees till
liberation or the doom day, whichever is first.
In the case of Jews, Ashkenazi Jews brought the Sephardi Jews to exploit
them, steal their children and sell the children and to have their
little Yemenite girls work as prostitutes for their lust.
Sven Noltemeier
Abusnaineh <sna...@peace.hut> wrote:
>> It tells much about Arab morality and bigotry how they treat their
>> Arab brothers. Why should Israel treat them better than they treat
>> themselves ? Israel took Arab Jews and made them citizens (not
>> without probems, but there was never a question about it).
>Mr. Sven
>Arabs did not treat us bad.
Oh, so you don't expect better -- that's fine with me.
> They did not want to resettle us because
>that means giving up our right in/of Palestine.
Yeah, they don't like you and make you into a political tool, which is
not very brotherly. Doesn't seem to bother you.
Nu, what do we expect of people who are proud of their sons blowing
themselves to pieces, murdering woman and children ?
Sven
Abusnaineh
Nobody is happy for the death of their children.
And if you are the same Sven that sent me the email, you really are very
sick.
Abusnaineh
Reuven Singer wrote:
>
> This is an excellent example of so-called Palestinian scholarship- and why
> they are the laughingstock of the world. If Solomon is a myth, how about
> Mohammed- he is probably a myth also.
I stated that Solomon is a belief to me. What is so weird about this
Palestinian scholarship and what is so laughable about it from the
viewpoint of the Jwhish intelligence?
Mohammad is not the prophet of the 7 million Palestinians. He is the
prophet of 1.3 billion Muslims. And unlike Solomon, he left
materialistic evidences of his existence and acts. Further, no real
Muslim states that the Quran is wrong while all Jews admit that either
parts or all of the Torah are man made. Indeed, the Talmud says that the
Torah can be wrong and it asks people to follow that Talmud, the words
of man, and not the Torah, the word of God. This is the evidence that
you (may) need:-
Talmud - Mas. Eiruvin 21b
"Raba made the following exposition: What is the purport of the
Scriptural text: And, furthermore my son, be admonished: Of making many
books etc.?13 My son, be more careful14 in [the observance of] the words
of the Scribes than in the words of the Torah, for in the laws of the
Torah there are positive and negative precepts;15 but, as to the laws of
the Scribes, whoever transgresses any of the enactments of the Scribes
incurs the penalty of death. In case you should object: If they are of
real value why were they not recorded [in the Torah]? Scripture stated:
‘Of making many books there is no end’.13"
Reuven Singer
This is an excellent example of so-called Palestinian scholarship- and why
they are the laughingstock of the world. If Solomon is a myth, how about
Mohammed- he is probably a myth also.
Shabatai Abusneineh <"shab"@hotmail.com(NO SPAM)> wrote in article
<60hul0$7...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
> Solomon is a belief, not a fact, and if the Romans have the titus, we
> need to know from which Talmudic Jerusalem it came from. But saying that
> the Aqsa is erected on the temple is untrue, biblically speaking,
> because 1)The Talmud described 2 Jerusalem, 2) 1,300 years after the
> temple was destroyed, Jews tried their luck in 331 at the time of
> Emperor Julian but burned to death in two trial. Now scientists
> speculate that it was 'natural gas' which (as you know) takes dozens of
> thousands of years to develop.
> In 1985 a historian came and claimed that the temple is located in Saudi
> Arabia. But the Saudi did not let him finish his story which was
> substantiated by names and archeological discoveries. Go to Arabia and
> locate your temple and rebuild your illusion there. Palestine has been
> inhabited by Palestinians for thousands of years. If you are looking for
> a temple to rebuild, you will not find it in Palestine.
William Wallace
On 26 Sep 1997 23:01:31 GMT, Jack Garbuz <JGA...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>>>Talmud - Mas. Arachin 32b
>>>"There were two [different cities called] Kadesh? Thus also were there
>>>two [cities called] Jerusalem.4"
>> More specifically, Solomon's Temple was built in the real
>>Jerusalem. They have no idea where that temple is to be found.
>>Archaeologists doubt either it or Solomon ever existed. >
>Solomon is a solid fact, and the Romans still have the arch of Titus
>showing the loot robbed from the Temple.
A temple is one thing. That there was a Solomon and that it was
his temple is another matter entirely.
But I am talking scientists here, not torah-thumpers.
Jack Garbuz
>> Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
>> little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
>> was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
>> of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
>> was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
>> larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
>
> I have tried to approach Garbuz's posts from the POV of logical flaws.
>It is hard, because there is little logic, and a lot of emotion. Let's try,
>though.
>
> Lebensraum as a notion comes from the Nazi, treated as language.
he East and to the West).<
The notion of "living space" certainly preceded the Nazis; nonetheless
they laid claim to territories that were outside the German homeland.
Israel IS the Jewish homeland, and it is the Arabs who came from their
homeland, Arabia, to occupy the lands of others who are the occupiers of
Jewish living space on Jewish territory.
>It assumes that the necessitous party has the power to inflict itself on the
>other.
>
> The previous poster had asserted that Israel was following such a policy
>and was creating the need by importing Russian Jews to colonize Palestine.
>Garbuz ridicules this assertion, making the incredible claim that: "It is the
>Arabs
>who sought Lebensraum in the little Jewish country."
>
> He adds another false assertion here as is his wont: "little Jewish
>country".
>The even here multiple implication is that the country was Jewish, which it
>factually was not and had not been for thousands of years, if ever,<
If ever??? I don't know what sewer your antecedents crawled out of to
occupy Indian land, but mine had a great literature and a great history
before yours descended from the trees.
> and "little" implying that the Jewish country was small, thus defenseless in the face of
>the numerous Arabs, and worthy of our sympathy and help. <
Heh, Israel faces numerical odds of at least 60 to 1 (300million arabs
vs. less than 5 million Jews). And it has a territory about the size of
New Jersey. If the US were to face comparable odds, it would be facing
60x260 million enemies, or 13.5 BILLION people, which is approximately
the population of over TEN Chinas. Now imagine the US surrounded on
three sides by 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, 9, 10 CHINAS!!! And on top of that,
imagine if 40% of the people INSIDE the US were enemies setting off
terrorist bombs! That is precisely Israel's position. No other country
even comes close to having to face such overwhelming odds.
> In fact,
>one reason for choosing Palestine to colonize was the fact that the people would not be able to defend themselves against the incur=
sion of the Zionists, since the people were poor and powerless. The power relation Garbuz implies did not exist.>
The ONLY reason Israel was chose by the "zionists" is that it is Jewish
soil, the Jewish homeland. There is no other rational reason for wanting
to settle there. Home is where the heart is. It is unfortunate that this
is not recognized by the myriad of Arabs and other Jew haters, but that
still doesn't change the fact that it is our land.
> But the thrust of his "argument" or more accurately quarrel is that the Jews because of their numbers, are more entitled to the=
Land than the miniscule palestinians.<
The Arab squatters can stay as a minority if they are peaceful. They are
entitled to civil rights if they behave in a civil manner. They are part
of the 300 million man Arab world, so they have 21 homelands to choose
from. But since they prefer stolen goods, like Jewish land, they make
trouble. They were given a chance under Oslo to get an autonomy zone on
our soil, but apparently they reject that too. As a result of both
wanting to steal our land, and even rejecting us when we let them have
rule over our stolen land, they have opened the way to more JEwish
resettlement on Jewish soil. So now, with God's help, we will settle
every inch of our soil and let you and the rest of the world prattle on.
> Interwoven with this is a much more complicated assertion that
>>the Balfour declaration gave the Jews a legal right in the Land superior to that of the inhabitants. The Balfour declaration did =
not do so, but he ignores this. Of course, the inhabitants were not asked their pleasure before the imperial power temporarily gover=
ning them made such a declaration, and this destroys any legitimacy of the declaration.>
First of all, since when do you have to ask squatter's permission to get
back your property? And Balfour recogized a JEwish Homeland in Palestine
provided the civil and religious rights of the other people (i.e., those
who happened to be there but whose homeland it WAS NOT) were upheld.
Balfour did not call for an Arab homeland in Palestine as that would have
been the equivalent of calling for a Mexican homeland in Canada.
> Garbuz takes all of world Jewry then extant, and compares this number to the number of Palestinians living at home in their own=
land. To gain sympathy,
>he then compares the number of Palestinians then to today.>
You are good at retelling others what I said. Present your case to the
jury, lyer :)
> Note how in the space of two sentences he changes the basis of comparison from the Palestinians numbering a half million to "Ar=
abs" who have 21 countries.<
It is true, ain't it? Look at the map and you can count over 20 Arab
countries.
> Viewing the Arabs as a lump, he then implies that the Arabs have quite enough land, thank you, to absorb the Palestinians, making =
in passing a misidentification between the residents of Palestine and the "Arabs". There is not now and never has an Arab nation.<=
They themselves worship the idea of the "umma," the Arab people. It is
called Pan-Arabism. It is THEY who consider themselves one people,
divided by many nations formed by the colonial powers. They only created
the ad hoc identity "Palestinian Arab" quite recently to counter the
Jews. No such nationality existed before 1948. Never.
> The original residents of the Arabian peninsula have a country,
>Saudi Arabia, but there are numerous others dominated by Arabs, along the north coast of Africa and inland.<
Yes, the spread out and invaded many countries in the 7th century AD.
They are pissed that the Jews got a part of their country back.
> He closes by saying that "they" don't let jews "leben", characterizing this as the problem.
>Assuming that the Arabs are the "they", there is no truth to the assertion.He misidentifies Israeli Jews with all Jews.<
They have refused to allow us to peacefully settle our land since 1918.
They have created 80 years of trouble as a result. Despite the fact that
everyone knows from the Bible that it is Jewish land, despite the fact of
the Balfour declaration upheld by the League of Nations, despite the fact
of UN recognition in 1948, they continue to violently resist the Jewish
return. And their allies are the billions of Jew haters who wish to deny
the Jewish people their right to live on earth. It is the most outrageous
form of racism, to deny only one people its homeland.
>
> I haven't really done justice to this short post. Garbuz never lets the truth interfere with
>a good story, and he does it well.
>Roger alexander>
No one can spin a yarn better than a Kentucky shyster high on moonshine,
but it is a challenge to dispel the duplicitous whoppers that you
throw so well.
William Wallace
On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 14:28:36 -0500, Abusnaineh <sna...@peace.hut>
wrote:
>Sven Noltemeier wrote:
>>
>> Abusnaineh <sna...@peace.hut> wrote:
>>
>> >> It tells much about Arab morality and bigotry how they treat their
>> >> Arab brothers. Why should Israel treat them better than they treat
>> >> themselves ? Israel took Arab Jews and made them citizens (not
>> >> without probems, but there was never a question about it).
>>
>> >Mr. Sven
>> >Arabs did not treat us bad.
>>
>> Oh, so you don't expect better -- that's fine with me.
>>
>> > They did not want to resettle us because
>> >that means giving up our right in/of Palestine.
>>
>> Yeah, they don't like you and make you into a political tool, which is
>> not very brotherly. Doesn't seem to bother you.
>>
>> Nu, what do we expect of people who are proud of their sons blowing
>> themselves to pieces, murdering woman and children ?
>Nobody is happy for the death of their children.
>And if you are the same Sven that sent me the email, you really are very
>sick.
No one is ever happy for the death of children. But if Nazis had
brought their families into the General Government areas of Poland no
one would blame anyone but the Nazis for any harm coming to the
children.
That Jews bring their children into an area under military
dispute for fifty years means only that jews should not have done such
a foolish thing in the first place.
EVEN IF they are so stupid as to believe some hyphenated god gave
the land to them that they would bring children into proximate danger
is very stupid. They have no one to blame but themselves for bringing
children into a perpetual war zone. Israel is a perpetual war zone as
every observer knows regardless of protestations that it should not
be.
Sven Noltemeier
Abusnaineh <sna...@peace.hut> wrote:
>> Nu, what do we expect of people who are proud of their sons blowing
>> themselves to pieces, murdering woman and children ?
>Nobody is happy for the death of their children.
I've heard otherwise from Arab propagandists.
>And if you are the same Sven that sent me the email, you really are very
>sick.
Me sending you email ? No, I don't want private contact with you.
Maybe it was the real Shabatai Zvi who sent it, or you are
hallucinating, as usual. Prozac overdose ?
Sven
Jack Garbuz
>>Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
>>little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
>>was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
>>of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
>>was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
>>larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
>
>of falsehoods.
>
> It is not a jewish country and there is no basis for such a claim
>save the myths believed by braindead torah-thumpers. >
Our "myths" have proven more accurate than any of your presumed "truths."
Whether it is the Dead Sea Scrolls found after 2,000 years, or whether it
is the proof of the existence of peoples like the Hittites who sold
Abraham his land, and way, way too many others even to begin to recount,
the simple fact is that no other people on the face of this planet has
documentation or proof that even begins to match that of the JEws. The
Arabs have nothing to prove any ancient connection with our land. Not one
shred of evidence of any kind whatsoever, except in Petra on the other
side of the Jordan and possibly some temporary settlements down in the
Negev. Go search for your own roots in the forests of Europe somewhere
and see what you come up with for yourself.
> There were over one million there two decades prior to Balfour.
>There were a handful of jews there who had been there for thousands of
>years. There were no 15 million there. >
The unbroken connection of Jews to their land, even when most were forced
to leave, is simply unprecedented. There was no "1 million Arabs there"
until thousands emigrated in after the Balfour declaration.
> By no census estimate did the European population of Jews change
>between the census estimates in 1939 and the two census years of 1946
>and 1949. If there was a population loss from WW I it was prior to
>1939 for some undetermined reason. >
You are a wack. Your lies are nothing but unsubstantiable myths.
Jack Garbuz
Jack Garbuz
WWal...@freedom.org (William Wallace) wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 03:09:55 -0500, Roger Alexander
>
>>Garbuz ridicules this assertion, making the incredible claim that: "It is the
>>Arabs
>>who sought Lebensraum in the little Jewish country."
>
> He does fancy himself a propagandist although an embarassin
>amateur. >
And you are an embarrassing Fuehrer wannabe. Why don't you just climb
into your bunker and end it like he did.
William Wallace
>Shabatai Abusnieneh <snt...@ihoussemailx.com> wrote:
>> But power does not constitute legitimacy in the long
>>run because there is no guarantee at all that Israel will be able to
>>monopolize the power balance in the region for eternity.
>"monopolize the power balance", what is that ? When there is a power
>balance, it takes two or more sides who have power, as is the case in
>the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is either a friendly one like in the
>European Union after WWII or it is an equilibrium of deterrence like
>in the Cold War between USA and USSR.
Change it to monopolize power. They only have it in formal war
not in guerilla warfare. At the latter they have nothing but terror.
>Peres dreamed of the first one for the ME, but it seems that the
>second alternative is more realistic (BTW it is already there for some
>decades). I'm quite optimistic that Israel is more like the US and
>the Arab states more like the East bloc. :-)
In general, to say Israel is like the US is an insult to the US.
As to the communists, it is a compliment they have not earned as yet.
>>As far as resettling these refugees elsewhere, this is not up to you.
>It tells much about Arab morality and bigotry how they treat their
>Arab brothers. Why should Israel treat them better than they treat
>themselves ? Israel took Arab Jews and made them citizens (not
>without probems, but there was never a question about it).
If they are resettled then there is surrender to the thieving
invaders. It is up to the Palestinians to stand on their own feet and
retake their own land. It is a matter of personal honor and
responsibility.
William Wallace
On 26 Sep 1997 22:57:24 GMT, Jack Garbuz <JGA...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>>>The solution is simple.
>>>Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
>>>elsewhere.
>> Or they can shoot them. It makes no difference when they are
>>intent upon intenting implementing Lebensraum as a policy and are
>>importing Russians to make it impossible to end that policy, thus
>>making peace impossible. >
>Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
>little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
>was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
>of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
>was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
>larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
There are many problems, all of them with your fanatic recitation
of falsehoods.
It is not a jewish country and there is no basis for such a claim
save the myths believed by braindead torah-thumpers.
There were over one million there two decades prior to Balfour.
There were a handful of jews there who had been there for thousands of
years. There were no 15 million there.
By no census estimate did the European population of Jews change
between the census estimates in 1939 and the two census years of 1946
and 1949. If there was a population loss from WW I it was prior to
1939 for some undetermined reason.
Fact is, zionists are looking for Lebensraum and they are taking
it in the area of the General Government of Israel.
They are no different from the Nazis they claim to abhor in any
manner.
William Wallace
On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 03:09:55 -0500, Roger Alexander
>
>
>Jack Garbuz wrote:
>
>> >>The solution is simple.
>> >
>> >>Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
>> >>elsewhere.
>> >
>> > Or they can shoot them. It makes no difference when they are
>> >intent upon intenting implementing Lebensraum as a policy and are
>> >importing Russians to make it impossible to end that policy, thus
>> >making peace impossible. >
>>
>> Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
>> little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
>> was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
>> of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
>> was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
>> larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
> I have tried to approach Garbuz's posts from the POV of logical flaws.
>It is hard, because there is little logic, and a lot of emotion. Let's try,
>though.
> Lebensraum as a notion comes from the Nazi, treated as language.
>It means the notion that the Germans needed (and by implication, deserved)
>living room at the expense of their neighbors (both to the East and to the
>West).
In fact if you look at the references to Lebensraum in the
speeches you find it is only to the East. There is no mention of to
the west, ever. If you look at the explicite writings rather than the
speeches the claim is based solely upon a numeric ratio of population
to square kilometers.
In practice the only clear objective of it was to retake the
Ukraine. The Ukraine was a slave state of the Russian empire and at
worst it would have only changed rulers. In fact, the communists had
murdered some 10 Million of them and suppressed their religion.
Clearly they viewed Hitler as their savior from the Bolsheviks.
>It assumes that the necessitous party has the power to inflict itself on the
>other.
> The previous poster had asserted that Israel was following such a policy
>and was creating the need by importing Russian Jews to colonize Palestine.
This is to stuff the ballot box so that no matter what party wins
that party will be jewish. No different that the communist system of
democracy.
>Garbuz ridicules this assertion, making the incredible claim that: "It is the
>Arabs
>who sought Lebensraum in the little Jewish country."
He does fancy himself a propagandist although an embarassin
amateur.
=====
William Wallace
On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 14:18:12 -0500, Abusnaineh <sna...@peace.hut>
wrote:
>Reuven Singer wrote:
>> This is an excellent example of so-called Palestinian scholarship- and why
>> they are the laughingstock of the world. If Solomon is a myth, how about
>> Mohammed- he is probably a myth also.
>I stated that Solomon is a belief to me. What is so weird about this
>Palestinian scholarship and what is so laughable about it from the
>viewpoint of the Jwhish intelligence?
>Mohammad is not the prophet of the 7 million Palestinians. He is the
>prophet of 1.3 billion Muslims. And unlike Solomon, he left
>materialistic evidences of his existence and acts. Further, no real
>Muslim states that the Quran is wrong while all Jews admit that either
>parts or all of the Torah are man made. Indeed, the Talmud says that the
>Torah can be wrong and it asks people to follow that Talmud, the words
>of man, and not the Torah, the word of God. This is the evidence that
>you (may) need:-
>Talmud - Mas. Eiruvin 21b
> "Raba made the following exposition: What is the purport of the
>Scriptural text: And, furthermore my son, be admonished: Of making many
>books etc.?13 My son, be more careful14 in [the observance of] the words
>of the Scribes than in the words of the Torah, for in the laws of the
>Torah there are positive and negative precepts;15 but, as to the laws of
>the Scribes, whoever transgresses any of the enactments of the Scribes
>incurs the penalty of death. In case you should object: If they are of
>real value why were they not recorded [in the Torah]? Scripture stated:
>‘Of making many books there is no end’.13"
Faith must be left to the believers, to their mosques and
synagogues and churches. To their privacy not their public personnae.
Faith can not be made into a political weapon to destroy
believers in other faiths and their places of worship and their lands
and their possessions.
Faith as a weapon is a weapon and an insult to god.
Jack Garbuz
>>Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
>>little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
>>was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
>>of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
>>was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
>>larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
>
>of falsehoods.
>
> It is not a jewish country and there is no basis for such a claim
>save the myths believed by braindead torah-thumpers. >
Our "myths" have proven more accurate than any of your presumed "truths."
Whether it is the Dead Sea Scrolls found after 2,000 years, or whether it
is the proof of the existence of peoples like the Hittites who sold
Abraham his land, and way, way too many others even to begin to recount,
the simple fact is that no other people on the face of this planet has
documentation or proof that even begins to match that of the JEws. The
Arabs have nothing to prove any ancient connection with our land. Not one
shred of evidence of any kind whatsoever, except in Petra on the other
side of the Jordan and possibly some temporary settlements down in the
Negev. Go search for your own roots in the forests of Europe somewhere
and see what you come up with for yourself.
> There were over one million there two decades prior to Balfour.
>There were a handful of jews there who had been there for thousands of
>years. There were no 15 million there. >
The unbroken connection of Jews to their land, even when most were forced
to leave, is simply unprecedented. There was no "1 million Arabs there"
until thousands emigrated in after the Balfour declaration.
> By no census estimate did the European population of Jews change
>between the census estimates in 1939 and the two census years of 1946
>and 1949. If there was a population loss from WW I it was prior to
>1939 for some undetermined reason. >
You are a wack. Your lies are nothing but unsubstantiable myths.
Roger Alexander
Jack Garbuz wrote:
> >> Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
> >> little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
> >> was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
> >> of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
> >> was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
> >> larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
> >
> > I have tried to approach Garbuz's posts from the POV of logical flaws.
> >It is hard, because there is little logic, and a lot of emotion. Let's try,
> >though.
> >
> > Lebensraum as a notion comes from the Nazi, treated as language.
> >It means the notion that the Germans needed (and by implication, deserved) living room at the expense of their neighbors (both to the East and to the West).<
>
> The notion of "living space" certainly preceded the Nazis; nonetheless
> they laid claim to territories that were outside the German homeland.
> Israel IS the Jewish homeland, and it is the Arabs who came from their
> homeland, Arabia, to occupy the lands of others who are the occupiers of
> Jewish living space on Jewish territory.
>
Utter nonsense as applied to the Arabs. They lived there, some of them, beforethe Hebrews came the first time. When the Arabs came they adopted the Arab
culture. So their invasion of the Land occurred before that of the hebrews, from
whom your laughable calim comes. The fact that the Arab culture comes from
Arabia, If it is fact, doesn't mean that all the Arabs came from there. Most
Jews are not even descended from Hebrews. God knows you aren't.
so the notion that the descendants of Hebrews should have a claim based on
ancient title is weak as against the natives. The notion that Ashkenazi Jews
should have a claim fails utterly, since they havve no ancestry (or next to none)
from the Hebrews. You spout nonsense. Since the calim as against present
holders of ownership fails anyway, it is nonsense on stilts. The only foundation
for the Israeli claim is that they took it from the Arabs. Possession is nine points
of the law, but the ethical claim is nil.
> >It assumes that the necessitous party has the power to inflict itself on the
> >other.
> >
> > The previous poster had asserted that Israel was following such a policy
> >and was creating the need by importing Russian Jews to colonize Palestine.
> >Garbuz ridicules this assertion, making the incredible claim that: "It is the
> >Arabs
> >who sought Lebensraum in the little Jewish country."
> >
> > He adds another false assertion here as is his wont: "little Jewish
> >country".
> >The even here multiple implication is that the country was Jewish, which it
> >factually was not and had not been for thousands of years, if ever,<
>
> If ever??? I don't know what sewer your antecedents crawled out of to
> occupy Indian land, but mine had a great literature and a great history
> before yours descended from the trees.
>
Best I can tell, my antecedents, like yours, were IndoEuropean peoples whocame from India or that general area. You have no Hebrew antecedents.
Their civilization was no better than that of the rest of the Indo-Europeans.
> > and "little" implying that the Jewish country was small, thus defenseless in the face of
> >the numerous Arabs, and worthy of our sympathy and help. <
> Heh, Israel faces numerical odds of at least 60 to 1 (300million arabs
> vs. less than 5 million Jews). And it has a territory about the size of
> New Jersey. If the US were to face comparable odds, it would be facing
> 60x260 million enemies, or 13.5 BILLION people, which is approximately
> the population of over TEN Chinas. Now imagine the US surrounded on
> three sides by 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, 9, 10 CHINAS!!! And on top of that,
> imagine if 40% of the people INSIDE the US were enemies setting off
> terrorist bombs! That is precisely Israel's position. No other country
> even comes close to having to face such overwhelming odds.
>
I mentioned that to liars, damn liars, and statisticians one needs a fourth group.here is a good example of the Zionist apologist at work. The Zionists went to
Palestine to start their new little country because the people were too poorto fight
them. They were right, of course. They remain generally right, since they make it
so today, and they are literally starving the Palestinians right now.
The Arabs are not united. If they were, Israel would be in big trouble. Garbuz
knows this, yet workd to get the sympathy he wants and feels Israel needs. The only
country that Israel presently has anything to fear from is Syria. And if Israel would give
back the Syrian territory they forcibly took, they could have peace there too.
Nor are 40 per cent of the Palestinians bombers. Very few of them support the bombers,
and there have been perhaps a dozen bombers. Far cry from 40 per cent. Garbuz is
raving, as usual.
> > In fact,
> >one reason for choosing Palestine to colonize was the fact that the people would not be able to defend themselves against the incursion of the Zionists, since the people were poor and powerless. The power relation Garbuz implies did not exist.>
>
> The ONLY reason Israel was chose by the "zionists" is that it is Jewish
> soil, the Jewish homeland. There is no other rational reason for wanting
> to settle there. Home is where the heart is. It is unfortunate that this
> is not recognized by the myriad of Arabs and other Jew haters, but that
> still doesn't change the fact that it is our land.
>
It is true that some of the Zionists wanted to go there for the reason that there were ties.But Uganda won in the early balloting. And at the end, a big part of the reason for
choosing Palestine was the fact that it would gain sympathy for the Zionists from
world jewry, who were then and are now far from united in support of Zionism.
> > But the thrust of his "argument" or more accurately quarrel is that the Jews because of their numbers, are more entitled to the Land than the miniscule palestinians.<
>
> The Arab squatters can stay as a minority if they are peaceful. They are
> entitled to civil rights if they behave in a civil manner.
In the prejudiced part of kentucky where I come from, in my youth there wasa very prejudiced expression which has survived as a parody of itself, and it fits here:
"That is mighty goddamned white of Garbuz.":
> They are part
> of the 300 million man Arab world, so they have 21 homelands to choose
> from. But since they prefer stolen goods, like Jewish land, they make
> trouble. They were given a chance under Oslo to get an autonomy zone on
> our soil, but apparently they reject that too. As a result of both
> wanting to steal our land, and even rejecting us when we let them have
> rule over our stolen land, they have opened the way to more JEwish
> resettlement on Jewish soil. So now, with God's help, we will settle
> every inch of our soil and let you and the rest of the world prattle on.
>
Translated into English from the Zionist propaganda, "we" the Zionists, are goingto take all of Palestine because the natives were bold enough to resist us. "We"
will show "them" and all the rest of the world who oppose Zionism.
> > Interwoven with this is a much more complicated assertion that
> >>the Balfour declaration gave the Jews a legal right in the Land superior to that of the inhabitants. The Balfour declaration did not do so, but he ignores this. Of course, the inhabitants were not asked their pleasure before the imperial power temporarily governing them made such a declaration, and this destroys any legitimacy of the declaration.>
>
> First of all, since when do you have to ask squatter's permission to get
> back your property?
A person is a squatter when he takes possession of land abandoned or notoccupied by a right ful owner. The Palestinians were never squatters, since
there was never a Jewish rightful owner from whom they took possession.
The term is here nonsense. But it is powerfully emotive. BTW, at law, if
a person squats on the land for the statutory term, openly and notoriously,
he gains the right to take title at the end of the period. The period is 21 years
at common law, and about the same by statute in most jurisdictions.
> And Balfour recogized a JEwish Homeland in Palestine
> provided the civil and religious rights of the other people (i.e., those
> who happened to be there but whose homeland it WAS NOT) were upheld.
No Jack, all it did was give the jews the right to have a homeland there. And itdid not put the Jews in a better legal position than the other inhabitants.
> Balfour did not call for an Arab homeland in Palestine as that would have
> been the equivalent of calling for a Mexican homeland in Canada.
>
> > Garbuz takes all of world Jewry then extant, and compares this number to the number of Palestinians living at home in their own land. To gain sympathy,
> >he then compares the number of Palestinians then to today.>
>
> You are good at retelling others what I said. Present your case to the
> jury, lyer :)
>
Oooh. All I do is point out that you are spouting nonsense. You have neversupported your position with any reference to authority. You can't.
> > Note how in the space of two sentences he changes the basis of comparison from the Palestinians numbering a half million to "Arabs" who have 21 countries.<
>
> It is true, ain't it? Look at the map and you can count over 20 Arab
> countries.
>
That's not the point.
> > Viewing the Arabs as a lump, he then implies that the Arabs have quite enough land, thank you, to absorb the Palestinians, making in passing a misidentification between the residents of Palestine and the "Arabs". There is not now and never has an Arab nation.<
>
> They themselves worship the idea of the "umma," the Arab people. It is
> called Pan-Arabism. It is THEY who consider themselves one people,
> divided by many nations formed by the colonial powers. They only created
> the ad hoc identity "Palestinian Arab" quite recently to counter the
> Jews. No such nationality existed before 1948. Never.
>
So what. The people still lived there. They owned the land. The Zioniststook it from them by force. The Zionist occupation remains illegal despite
your pathetic defense.
> > The original residents of the Arabian peninsula have a country,
> >Saudi Arabia, but there are numerous others dominated by Arabs, along the north coast of Africa and inland.<
>
> Yes, the spread out and invaded many countries in the 7th century AD.
> They are pissed that the Jews got a part of their country back.
>
They are pissed that the Zionists, not all Jews, invaded a peaceful country andconquered it by force, and presently refuse to make peace, while continuing to
occupy the whole country by force, and oppressing the native people. They ahve
good reason to be pissed. You have no legal defense to the above. You know this
which is why you post your absurd nonsense.
> > He closes by saying that "they" don't let jews "leben", characterizing this as the problem.
> >Assuming that the Arabs are the "they", there is no truth to the assertion.He misidentifies Israeli Jews with all Jews.<
>
> They have refused to allow us to peacefully settle our land since 1918.
> They have created 80 years of trouble as a result. Despite the fact that
> everyone knows from the Bible that it is Jewish land, despite the fact of
> the Balfour declaration upheld by the League of Nations, despite the fact
> of UN recognition in 1948, they continue to violently resist the Jewish
> return. And their allies are the billions of Jew haters who wish to deny
> the Jewish people their right to live on earth. It is the most outrageous
> form of racism, to deny only one people its homeland.
>
>
Yeah, it's terrible that the native people of Palestine should oppose themaster race.
> >
> > I haven't really done justice to this short post. Garbuz never lets the truth interfere with
> >a good story, and he does it well.
> >Roger alexander>
>
> No one can spin a yarn better than a Kentucky shyster high on moonshine,
> but it is a challenge to dispel the duplicitous whoppers that you
> throw so well.
In your dreams, Garbuz. You havve no support for your position.
The whole world takes the other side, except for the Zionists and
the ol' Uncle Sap.
Roger Alexander
William Wallace
>Abusnaineh <sna...@peace.hut> wrote:
>>> Nu, what do we expect of people who are proud of their sons blowing
>>> themselves to pieces, murdering woman and children ?
>>Nobody is happy for the death of their children.
>I've heard otherwise from Arab propagandists.
And when the IDF murders children they are treated as heroes by
Israeli propagandists, particularly when it is deliberate. That makes
it government terrorism.
William Wallace
On 28 Sep 1997 16:00:26 GMT, Jack Garbuz <JGA...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>WWal...@freedom.org (William Wallace) wrote:
>>On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 03:09:55 -0500, Roger Alexander
>>>Garbuz ridicules this assertion, making the incredible claim that: "It is the
>>>Arabs
>>>who sought Lebensraum in the little Jewish country."
>> He does fancy himself a propagandist although an embarassin
>>amateur. >
>And you are an embarrassing Fuehrer wannabe. Why don't you just climb
>into your bunker and end it like he did.
You wish to make it that simple but it is not that. Only a jew
would pretend to believe such a thing. But as they know they are lying
they know they are bearing false witness. But since that is not a
violation of law except when towards a fellow jew they continue in
their lies.
William Wallace
On 28 Sep 1997 16:20:54 GMT, Jack Garbuz <JGA...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>>>Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
>>>little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
>>>was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
>>>of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
>>>was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
>>>larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
>>
>> There are many problems, all of them with your fanatic recitation
>>of falsehoods.
>>
>> It is not a jewish country and there is no basis for such a claim
>>save the myths believed by braindead torah-thumpers. >
>
>Our "myths" have proven more accurate than any of your presumed "truths."
That is what all creationists try to claim. But they are also
lying.
Post your crap in talk.origins and be ridiculed by professionals.
Jack Garbuz
>> > Lebensraum as a notion comes from the Nazi, treated as language.
o the East and to the West).<
>>
>> The notion of "living space" certainly preceded the Nazis; nonetheless
>> they laid claim to territories that were outside the German homeland.
>> Israel IS the Jewish homeland, and it is the Arabs who came from their
>> homeland, Arabia, to occupy the lands of others who are the occupiers of
>> Jewish living space on Jewish territory.
>>
>
>Utter nonsense as applied to the Arabs. They lived there, some of them, beforethe Hebrews came the first time. <
That is absurd, unless you mean that Ishmael was older than his younger
half brother Isaac, and hence yes an Arab lived on the soil of Israel
before a Jew. But the BIble clearly states that Ishmael's patrimony would
be to the East. In other words, the other side of the Jordan river. Yes,
when Abraham came he saw Hittites and Canaanites living on the land that
was promised to his progeny. But God said that that land would belong to
the descendents of Jacob and had cursed Canaan earlier on in Genesis for
their inherent wickedness. So any Arab who identifies with Canaan is
cursed by his own lips. The Arabs are an interloping minority squatting
on JEwish land. They have the same rights as any minority people, but
definitely no more than that. Certainly not national rights on Jewish
soil.
> When the Arabs came they adopted the Arab
>culture. So their invasion of the Land occurred before that of the hebrews, from
>whom your laughable calim comes. The fact that the Arab culture comes from
>Arabia, If it is fact, doesn't mean that all the Arabs came from there.<
Besides Jews, who remained the majority until the Arabs came in the 7th
century, there were non-Jews who were descendents of Samaritans who had
inhabited Samaria (which was the old Kingdom of Israel destroyed by
Sargon who carried the ten tribes into captivity). The coming of Arab
conquerors in the 7th century tipped the population scales for sure.
> Most
>Jews are not even descended from Hebrews. God knows you aren't.
>so the notion that the descendants of Hebrews should have a claim based on ancient title is weak as against the natives. The notion=
that Ashkenazi Jews should have a claim fails utterly, since they havve no ancestry (or next to none) from the Hebrews. You spout =
nonsense. Since the calim as against present
>holders of ownership fails anyway, it is nonsense on stilts.<
The fact that Jews were driven around the world, landless and homeless,
forced to live from their wits and on whatever capital they could
accumulate through trade, raped and pillaged at the will and whim of
every local chieftain does not mean that we have lost our rights. WE
clung to our homeland in our prayers; the Jewish liturgy books that
orthodox JEws recite for over an hour 3 times a day is replete with
continuous reference to our land. Indeed Judaism and Judah are as
inseparable as Christianity and Christ. A Jew without Jerusalem is like a
Christian without CHrist. At any rate, over 40 percent of Israelis are of
middle eastern origin, from Yemen, Morocco, Iraq, Egypt, etc., so your
racist attempt to split off those European Jews who were raped but
nevertheless remained true to their culture from their ancient roots is
as futile as it is despicable.
> The only foundation
>for the Israeli claim is that they took it from the Arabs. Possession is nine points
>of the law, but the ethical claim is nil.>
The settled and fought courageously for what was theirs in the first
place. They faced off Arab army after army alone, with no outside aid
except in 1973 when there was an airlift from the US. But by the time the
new US arms arrived, the battlefield had already been stabilized. Britain
and the Soviet Union had had more aid during WWII against Germany then
Israel had fighting alone against 100 to 1 odds in 1947, 1956, 1967 and
1973. So that "possession" has not come easy.
>> >The even here multiple implication is that the country was Jewish, which it
>> >factually was not and had not been for thousands of years, if ever,<
>>
>> If ever??? I don't know what sewer your antecedents crawled out of to
>> occupy Indian land, but mine had a great literature and a great history before yours descended from the trees.
>>
>
>Best I can tell, my antecedents, like yours, were IndoEuropean peoples whocame from India or that general area. You have no Hebrew=
antecedents.
>Their civilization was no better than that of the rest of the Indo-Europeans.>
That you know nothing, and are patently ignorant of history, should be
obvious. The conquest of India by Europeans or "Aryans" is the subject of
the Vedas. IndoEuropeans did not "come from India" so that sentence alone
condemns you as the ignoramus that you really are, law degree or no.
Yes, there are Indian Jews who lived (and some still live) mostly in
Bombay, who had come there from Iraq. Many of those Indian Jews today
live in Israel, mostly around Dimona and other parts of the NEgev. Other
than that, I don't know what the hell you are talking about, and neither
do you. At any rate, Abraham was a Chaldean, Moses was born in Egypt, as
was Joshua, and the Jewish people have never claimed to be a distinct
race, like the Germans, but rather a people united by religion, by
matrilineal descent, and by a culture rooted in their ancient soil.
>
>> > and "little" implying that the Jewish country was small, thus defenseless in the face of
>> >the numerous Arabs, and worthy of our sympathy and help. <
>> Heh, Israel faces numerical odds of at least 60 to 1 (300million arabs
>> vs. less than 5 million Jews). And it has a territory about the size of
>> New Jersey. If the US were to face comparable odds, it would be facing
>> 60x260 million enemies, or 13.5 BILLION people, which is approximately
>> the population of over TEN Chinas. Now imagine the US surrounded on
>> three sides by 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, 9, 10 CHINAS!!! And on top of that,
>> imagine if 40% of the people INSIDE the US were enemies setting off
>> terrorist bombs! That is precisely Israel's position. No other country
>> even comes close to having to face such overwhelming odds.>>
>
>I mentioned that to liars, damn liars, and statisticians one needs a fourth group.here is a good example of the Zionist apologist a=
t work. The Zionists went to
>Palestine to start their new little country because the people were too poorto fight
>them.<
Ohhh, the Arab were too poor to wipe us out, were they? A shame! WHat a
humiliation :) They are still to poor, huh? Why doesn't Arafat turn over
his bank account to the poor people so that they can all buy Uzis from
Israeli arms merchants so that they can wipe us out?
> They were right, of course. They remain generally right, since they make it so today, and they are literally starving the Palest=
inians right now. The Arabs are not united. If they were, Israel would be in big trouble. Garbuz knows this, yet workd to get the =
sympathy he wants and feels Israel needs. <
Omigosh, the Jews are starving out the Palestinains, and the Iraqis, and
the blacks in Harlem too. We have incredible power and control over food,
you know. Besides the media, we control the food sources of the world.
Why, just the other day I was talking to the CEO of Archer, Daniel
Midlands discussing how we could starve Saudi Arabia into submission too.
>The only country that Israel presently has anything to fear from is Syria. And if Israel would give back the Syrian territory they=
forcibly took, they could have peace there too.<
Why of course we could. Oh, the Galilee is called Southern Syria by the
Syrians, so why not just hand that back too, now? Since we equipped
Arafat's army with Israeli weapons, why not also upgrade the Syrian tanks
while we are at it? After all, those poor Arabs would be humiliated if we
didn't help them out, and some of our own factories could use the work
upgrading Syrian tanks and planes. Oh yes there are plenty of Jews in
Israel who for a buck, or even a dinar, will sell out their country and
their mothers too. Seriously, Israel will have peace with Syria when
Assad and his Arab Nazi regime is dead and buried, and replaced by one
with some faint semblance of democracy. But there is no way that Syrian
forces will wash their feet in the Sea of Galilee no matter what. Part of
the Golan is Biblical Israel and it too has been fought over many times.
Before there can be any progress on Golan, there has to be a change of
regimes in Damascus. I guess that will happen when the scorpion loses his
stinger.
> Nor are 40 per cent of the Palestinians bombers. Very few of them support the bombers, and there have been perhaps a dozen bom=
bers. Far cry from 40 per cent. Garbuz is raving, as usual.<
Here I agree with you for once. Seventy five percent of the Arabs have
been in the grip of violent leaders since 1920. I believe the majority
prefer peaceful coexistence and would gladly accept Israeli citizenship
if they were not under the control of maniacs. It is the lunatics who run
Arab societies today who are responsible for the ruination of their
people and if the Arab peoples could overthrow the monstrosities that
control their lives, peace could finally come to the area. Peace is
really only possible amongst democracies, as the history of Europe in the
latter part of this century has demonstrated.
>> > In fact,
>> >one reason for choosing Palestine to colonize was the fact that the people would not be able to defend themselves against the in=
cursion of the Zionists, since the people were poor and powerless. The power relation Garbuz implies did not exist.>
>>
>> The ONLY reason Israel was chose by the "zionists" is that it is Jewish
>> soil, the Jewish homeland. There is no other rational reason for wanting to settle there. Home is where the heart is. It is unfor=
tunate that this is not recognized by the myriad of Arabs and other Jew haters, but that still doesn't change the fact that it is ou=
r land.>>
.....
>> The Arab squatters can stay as a minority if they are peaceful. They are
>> entitled to civil rights if they behave in a civil manner.>>
>In the prejudiced part of kentucky where I come from, in my youth there wasa very prejudiced expression which has survived as a par=
ody of itself, and it fits here: "That is mighty goddamned white of Garbuz.":>
Oh you came from the prejudiced part? I thought you came from the part
that was too drunk to know the difference :) Hey, do the Jews run the
stills in Kentucky? Do they control the likker supply too? Or maybe
you're like the Arabs and don't let no goddam Jews live in your neck of
the woods, i.e., the Redneck part.
>> They are part
>> of the 300 million man Arab world, so they have 21 homelands to choose
>> from. But since they prefer stolen goods, like Jewish land, they make
>> trouble. They were given a chance under Oslo to get an autonomy zone on
>> our soil, but apparently they reject that too. As a result of both
>> wanting to steal our land, and even rejecting us when we let them have
>> rule over our stolen land, they have opened the way to more JEwish
>> resettlement on Jewish soil. So now, with God's help, we will settle
>> every inch of our soil and let you and the rest of the world prattle on.
>>
>
>Translated into English from the Zionist propaganda, "we" the Zionists, are goingto take all of Palestine because the natives wer=
e bold enough to resist us. <
No. Every inch of soil is Jewish land, but if it is owned by Arabs who
have deeds, we will buy it back. If they are total squatters, they have
to move over to let us in. There is no way that Arabs will monopolize
Jewish land against the Jews. The Jewish people have first rights to
Jewish land.
> "We"
>will show "them" and all the rest of the world who oppose Zionism.>
The "world" has no right to oppose zionism anymore than the "world" has
the right to oppose French rights in France, Italian rights in Italy,
German rights in Germany, or American rights on Indian lands. What if the
UN passed a resolution calling for Kentuckians to get off Indian lands
and go back to England and IReland? Actually, the UN would be more in
their rights to do that than to tell JEws they cannot settle in Judea.
>> > Interwoven with this is a much more complicated assertion that
>> >>the Balfour declaration gave the Jews a legal right in the Land superior to that of the inhabitants. The Balfour declaration d=
id not do so, but he ignores this. Of course, the inhabitants were not asked their pleasure before the imperial power temporarily go=
verning them made such a declaration, and this destroys any legitimacy of the declaration.>
>>
>> First of all, since when do you have to ask squatter's permission to get back your property?>
>A person is a squatter when he takes possession of land abandoned or notoccupied by a right ful owner. The Palestinians were never=
squatters, since there was never a Jewish rightful owner from whom they took possession.<
That is the true anti-Jew talking, saying we never had a land and that
the Bible is all a myth we put together to take away a New Jersey sized
country from the Arabs. Why didn't we just spin a yarn together that we
were the last of the Mohicans and just take away New York State instead?
Why steal a land that is small and 60% desert? New York State is nice and
green, with plenty of water. Why didn't we spend the last 3,000 years
putting together a book to steal the Big Apple instead?
>The term is here nonsense. But it is powerfully emotive. BTW, at law, if a person squats on the land for the statutory term, open=
ly and notoriously, he gains the right to take title at the end of the period. The period is 21 years at common law, and about the =
same by statute in most jurisdictions.>
You might be talking about English common law. That statute carries no
weight in Jewish law which is applicable to Jewish lands. According to
Jewish law, all land must revert to its original owners after 50 years
(the Jubilee year). In effect, all lands are actually leased for 50 years
(just as you lease a car) and are really owned by the clans of the tribes
of Israel. There can be no squatters on the small Jewish lands that God
in his infinite mercy granted us. God made sure to protect OUR rights by
his merciful laws.
>
..........
>Yeah, it's terrible that the native people of Palestine should oppose themaster race.<
The Jewish story begins with a non-Jew, Adam, and the world is saved by
another non-Jew, Noah. Thousands of years pass before the man we consider
to be the first Jew, Abraham, arrives on the scene. Of course, Islam
later called him the first Moslem since he was the father of Ishmael, the
first "Arab." But there is no master race, only two people competing for
the same land. But it is the Arabs who have chosen to try to supplant us
and our religion, as they rewrote their books to nullify our rights, and
planted their mosques on our soil. They consider THEMSELVES to be the
master race, and are humiliated because God refuses to let them destroy a
little people to who HE promised the little land.
>> I haven't really done justice to this short post. Garbuz never lets the truth interfere with
>> >a good story, and he does it well.
>> >Roger alexander>
>>
>> No one can spin a yarn better than a Kentucky shyster high on moonshine,
>> but it is a challenge to dispel the duplicitous whoppers that you
>> throw so well.
>
> In your dreams, Garbuz. You havve no support for your position.
>The whole world takes the other side, except for the Zionists and
>the ol' Uncle Sap.
>Roger Alexander<
I guess the Almighty will decide that in the final analysis, as HE is the
the ultimate author and executioner of justice. What man proposes, God
disposes. I'm happy that Uncle Sap has mostly gone along with its better
instincts in supporting Jewish rights. Perhaps that is why it has been
spared God's wrath in other matters. Just the opinion of a "torah
thumper" to use your friend Matt's terminology.
Roger Alexander
William Wallace wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 03:09:55 -0500, Roger Alexander
> <rla...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Jack Garbuz wrote:
> >
> >> >>The solution is simple.
> >> >
> >> >>Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
> >> >>elsewhere.
> >> >
> >> > Or they can shoot them. It makes no difference when they are
> >> >intent upon intenting implementing Lebensraum as a policy and are
> >> >importing Russians to make it impossible to end that policy, thus
> >> >making peace impossible. >
> >>
> >> Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
> >> little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
> >> was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
> >> of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
> >> was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
> >> larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
>
> > I have tried to approach Garbuz's posts from the POV of logical flaws.
> >It is hard, because there is little logic, and a lot of emotion. Let's try,
> >though.
>
> > Lebensraum as a notion comes from the Nazi, treated as language.
> >It means the notion that the Germans needed (and by implication, deserved)
> >living room at the expense of their neighbors (both to the East and to the
> >West).
>
> In fact if you look at the references to Lebensraum in the
> speeches you find it is only to the East. There is no mention of to
> the west, ever. If you look at the explicite writings rather than the
> speeches the claim is based solely upon a numeric ratio of population
> to square kilometers.
>
I am aware of this. I included the Westerly direction to make it clear
thatGermany wanted back Alsace and Lorraine. RLA
> In practice the only clear objective of it was to retake the
> Ukraine. The Ukraine was a slave state of the Russian empire and at
> worst it would have only changed rulers. In fact, the communists had
> murdered some 10 Million of them and suppressed their religion.
> Clearly they viewed Hitler as their savior from the Bolsheviks.
Here you rewrite history. The Germans had only contempt for all the Slavs.
Their treatment of the Ukrainians was so bad that they revolted and thus
caused the Germans a lot of problems contributing to their final defeat.
The Nazis were worse than the zionists, by far.
Roger Alexander
Roger Alexander
Jack Garbuz wrote:
> >> > Lebensraum as a notion comes from the Nazi, treated as language.
> >> >It means the notion that the Germans needed (and by implication, deserved) living room at the expense of their neighbors (both to the East and to the West).<
> >>
> >> The notion of "living space" certainly preceded the Nazis; nonetheless
> >> they laid claim to territories that were outside the German homeland.
> >> Israel IS the Jewish homeland, and it is the Arabs who came from their
> >> homeland, Arabia, to occupy the lands of others who are the occupiers of
> >> Jewish living space on Jewish territory.
> >>
> >
> >Utter nonsense as applied to the Arabs. They lived there, some of them, beforethe Hebrews came the first time. <
>
> That is absurd, unless you mean that Ishmael was older than his younger
> half brother Isaac, and hence yes an Arab lived on the soil of Israel
> before a Jew. But the BIble clearly states that Ishmael's patrimony would
> be to the East. In other words, the other side of the Jordan river. Yes,
> when Abraham came he saw Hittites and Canaanites living on the land that
> was promised to his progeny. But God said that that land would belong to
> the descendents of Jacob and had cursed Canaan earlier on in Genesis for
> their inherent wickedness. So any Arab who identifies with Canaan is
> cursed by his own lips. The Arabs are an interloping minority squatting
> on JEwish land. They have the same rights as any minority people, but
> definitely no more than that. Certainly not national rights on Jewish
> soil.
>
I'm not talking Biblical nonsense, but serious scholarship. See Palestine and IsraelA Challenge to Justice by John Quigley and his references. The native Palestinians
were there when the Hebrews came the first (recorded) time. When the arab (pre-Muslim)
civilization came to them, they adopted it. When the Muslims (also Arabs) came,
they adopted Islam. They have continuously resided (some of them) in Palestine
longer than the Hebrews. And since you have no Hebrew blood (or damned little)
you don't even have the claim of blood. You truly is sucks, Garbuz.
> > When the Arabs came they adopted the Arab
> >culture. So their invasion of the Land occurred before that of the hebrews, from
> >whom your laughable calim comes. The fact that the Arab culture comes from
> >Arabia, If it is fact, doesn't mean that all the Arabs came from there.<
>
> Besides Jews, who remained the majority until the Arabs came in the 7th
> century, there were non-Jews who were descendents of Samaritans who had
> inhabited Samaria (which was the old Kingdom of Israel destroyed by
> Sargon who carried the ten tribes into captivity). The coming of Arab
> conquerors in the 7th century tipped the population scales for sure.
>
Yes, jack, some Jews lived in Palestine for all those years. Many of these peopleabhor the Zionists and all their works.
> > Most
> >Jews are not even descended from Hebrews. God knows you aren't.
> >so the notion that the descendants of Hebrews should have a claim based on ancient title is weak as against the natives. The notion that Ashkenazi Jews should have a claim fails utterly, since they havve no ancestry (or next to none) from the Hebrews. You spout nonsense. Since the calim as against present
> >holders of ownership fails anyway, it is nonsense on stilts.<
>
> The fact that Jews were driven around the world, landless and homeless,
> forced to live from their wits and on whatever capital they could
> accumulate through trade, raped and pillaged at the will and whim of
> every local chieftain does not mean that we have lost our rights.
No one, at least not me, says you have lost anything. I say there is no right tobe lost by the residence in Palestine of the natives. Your claim that you have
a right to exclude native Palestinians from their homes is beyond absurd.
> WE
> clung to our homeland in our prayers; the Jewish liturgy books that
> orthodox JEws recite for over an hour 3 times a day is replete with
> continuous reference to our land. Indeed Judaism and Judah are as
> inseparable as Christianity and Christ. A Jew without Jerusalem is like a
> Christian without CHrist.
The fact that one has an abstract need or desire for a benefit does not confera right to that benefit. If Jews wanted to go to Palestine and live, that was
fine with the world and was the thrust of the Balfour Declaration. (I note here
that it was not fine with the native Palestinians, who were never consulted,
and whose failure of consent is of legal significance.) The problem the world has
with Zionism is that its ideology commands them to gather in all the Jews,
and their practice has been to take the land from the natives by force, which
is wrong and illegal under international law.
THECRUX OF THE PRESENT PROBLEM WITH ZIONISM IS THAT
IT RULES ISRAEL, AND THAT THE IDEOLOGY PREVENTS ANY
PEACE SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE ISARELIS AND THE PALESTINIANS
BECAUSE THE IDEOLOGY REQUIRES THE PALESTINIANS TO LEAVE
PALESTINE.
I put the above in caps because I believe here is the heart of the present matter,
not some abstruse argument about ancestors.
RLA
> At any rate, over 40 percent of Israelis are of
> middle eastern origin, from Yemen, Morocco, Iraq, Egypt, etc., so your
> racist attempt to split off those European Jews who were raped but
> nevertheless remained true to their culture from their ancient roots is
> as futile as it is despicable.
>
This remark cannot be parsed so is left. But if you mean that some Jews have Hebrewroots, that may well be. Even if all Jews were direct descendants of Hebrews, and even
if the world agreed that the exile were a present illegality which demanded redress,
still nothing would be resolved by the forcefuldispossession of people who had lived
in the Land coextensively with the original Hebrews, and who remained for 2000
years. I seriously doubt that there is a scholar of international law alive who would
champion your argument. RLa
> > The only foundation
> >for the Israeli claim is that they took it from the Arabs. Possession is nine points
> >of the law, but the ethical claim is nil.>
>
> The settled and fought courageously for what was theirs in the first
> place.
Again no proof, just bald assertion of falsehood, romantic yes, but falsehoodall the same.
> They faced off Arab army after army alone, with no outside aid
> except in 1973 when there was an airlift from the US. But by the time the
> new US arms arrived, the battlefield had already been stabilized. Britain
> and the Soviet Union had had more aid during WWII against Germany then
> Israel had fighting alone against 100 to 1 odds in 1947, 1956, 1967 and
> 1973. So that "possession" has not come easy.
>
So would you agree that if the germans had won WW II, they would have been entitledto keep the land they won? Sounds mighty like the same thing. Might makes right.
Israel Uber Alles!
RLa
> >> >The even here multiple implication is that the country was Jewish, which it
> >> >factually was not and had not been for thousands of years, if ever,<
> >>
> >> If ever??? I don't know what sewer your antecedents crawled out of to
> >> occupy Indian land, but mine had a great literature and a great history before yours descended from the trees.
> >>
> >
> >Best I can tell, my antecedents, like yours, were IndoEuropean peoples whocame from India or that general area. You have no Hebrew antecedents.
> >Their civilization was no better than that of the rest of the Indo-Europeans.>
>
> That you know nothing, and are patently ignorant of history, should be
> obvious.
I'll match your ignorance against mine any day.
> The conquest of India by Europeans or "Aryans" is the subject of
> the Vedas. IndoEuropeans did not "come from India" so that sentence alone
> condemns you as the ignoramus that you really are, law degree or no.
> Yes, there are Indian Jews who lived (and some still live) mostly in
> Bombay, who had come there from Iraq. Many of those Indian Jews today
> live in Israel, mostly around Dimona and other parts of the NEgev. Other
> than that, I don't know what the hell you are talking about, and neither
> do you. At any rate, Abraham was a Chaldean, Moses was born in Egypt, as
> was Joshua, and the Jewish people have never claimed to be a distinct
> race, like the Germans, but rather a people united by religion, by
> matrilineal descent, and by a culture rooted in their ancient soil.
> >
> >> > and "little" implying that the Jewish country was small, thus defenseless in the face of
> >> >the numerous Arabs, and worthy of our sympathy and help. <
> >> Heh, Israel faces numerical odds of at least 60 to 1 (300million arabs
> >> vs. less than 5 million Jews). And it has a territory about the size of
> >> New Jersey. If the US were to face comparable odds, it would be facing
> >> 60x260 million enemies, or 13.5 BILLION people, which is approximately
> >> the population of over TEN Chinas. Now imagine the US surrounded on
> >> three sides by 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, 9, 10 CHINAS!!! And on top of that,
> >> imagine if 40% of the people INSIDE the US were enemies setting off
> >> terrorist bombs! That is precisely Israel's position. No other country
> >> even comes close to having to face such overwhelming odds.>>
>
> >
> >I mentioned that to liars, damn liars, and statisticians one needs a fourth group.here is a good example of the Zionist apologist at work. The Zionists went to
> >Palestine to start their new little country because the people were too poorto fight
> >them.<
>
> Ohhh, the Arab were too poor to wipe us out, were they? A shame! WHat a
> humiliation :) They are still to poor, huh? Why doesn't Arafat turn over
> his bank account to the poor people so that they can all buy Uzis from
> Israeli arms merchants so that they can wipe us out?
>
> > They were right, of course. They remain generally right, since they make it so today, and they are literally starving the Palestinians right now. The Arabs are not united. If they were, Israel would be in big trouble. Garbuz knows this, yet workd to get the sympathy he wants and feels Israel needs. <
>
> Omigosh, the Jews are starving out the Palestinains, and the Iraqis, and
> the blacks in Harlem too. We have incredible power and control over food,
> you know. Besides the media, we control the food sources of the world.
> Why, just the other day I was talking to the CEO of Archer, Daniel
> Midlands discussing how we could starve Saudi Arabia into submission too.
>
Just Palestine, jack, and it isn't funny. It is real. Israel is every day doing terriblethings, and you are an apologist for this evil. RLA
> >The only country that Israel presently has anything to fear from is Syria. And if Israel would give back the Syrian territory they forcibly took, they could have peace there too.<
>
> Why of course we could. Oh, the Galilee is called Southern Syria by the
> Syrians, so why not just hand that back too, now? Since we equipped
> Arafat's army with Israeli weapons, why not also upgrade the Syrian tanks
> while we are at it? After all, those poor Arabs would be humiliated if we
> didn't help them out, and some of our own factories could use the work
> upgrading Syrian tanks and planes. Oh yes there are plenty of Jews in
> Israel who for a buck, or even a dinar, will sell out their country and
> their mothers too. Seriously, Israel will have peace with Syria when
> Assad and his Arab Nazi regime is dead and buried, and replaced by one
> with some faint semblance of democracy. But there is no way that Syrian
> forces will wash their feet in the Sea of Galilee no matter what. Part of
> the Golan is Biblical Israel and it too has been fought over many times.
> Before there can be any progress on Golan, there has to be a change of
> regimes in Damascus. I guess that will happen when the scorpion loses his
> stinger.
>
When Assad is gone, the rationale for his truculence will remain. RLA
> > Nor are 40 per cent of the Palestinians bombers. Very few of them support the bombers, and there have been perhaps a dozen bombers. Far cry from 40 per cent. Garbuz is raving, as usual.<
>
> Here I agree with you for once. Seventy five percent of the Arabs have
> been in the grip of violent leaders since 1920. I believe the majority
> prefer peaceful coexistence and would gladly accept Israeli citizenship
> if they were not under the control of maniacs. It is the lunatics who run
> Arab societies today who are responsible for the ruination of their
> people and if the Arab peoples could overthrow the monstrosities that
> control their lives, peace could finally come to the area. Peace is
> really only possible amongst democracies, as the history of Europe in the
> latter part of this century has demonstrated.
>
If Israel wanted peace, they could have it overnight. The mechanism ofan agreemnt is in place. Abide by Oslo, announce you are abiding, and
Voila! It is not a bad deal for Israel. You Zionists just have to have it all.
Roger Alexander
> >> > In fact,
> >> >one reason for choosing Palestine to colonize was the fact that the people would not be able to defend themselves against the incursion of the Zionists, since the people were poor and powerless. The power relation Garbuz implies did not exist.>
> >>
> >> The ONLY reason Israel was chose by the "zionists" is that it is Jewish
> >> soil, the Jewish homeland. There is no other rational reason for wanting to settle there. Home is where the heart is. It is unfortunate that this is not recognized by the myriad of Arabs and other Jew haters, but that still doesn't change the fact that it is our land.>>
> .....
> >> The Arab squatters can stay as a minority if they are peaceful. They are
> >> entitled to civil rights if they behave in a civil manner.>>
>
> >In the prejudiced part of kentucky where I come from, in my youth there wasa very prejudiced expression which has survived as a parody of itself, and it fits here: "That is mighty goddamned white of Garbuz.":>
>
> Oh you came from the prejudiced part? I thought you came from the part
> that was too drunk to know the difference :) Hey, do the Jews run the
> stills in Kentucky? Do they control the likker supply too? Or maybe
> you're like the Arabs and don't let no goddam Jews live in your neck of
> the woods, i.e., the Redneck part.
>
Adolph Ochs ran the newspaper in Mt. Sterling in the late 1800's before hewent to New York. RLA
> >> They are part
> >> of the 300 million man Arab world, so they have 21 homelands to choose
> >> from. But since they prefer stolen goods, like Jewish land, they make
> >> trouble. They were given a chance under Oslo to get an autonomy zone on
> >> our soil, but apparently they reject that too. As a result of both
> >> wanting to steal our land, and even rejecting us when we let them have
> >> rule over our stolen land, they have opened the way to more JEwish
> >> resettlement on Jewish soil. So now, with God's help, we will settle
> >> every inch of our soil and let you and the rest of the world prattle on.
> >>
> >
> >Translated into English from the Zionist propaganda, "we" the Zionists, are goingto take all of Palestine because the natives were bold enough to resist us. <
>
> No. Every inch of soil is Jewish land, but if it is owned by Arabs who
> have deeds, we will buy it back. If they are total squatters, they have
> to move over to let us in. There is no way that Arabs will monopolize
> Jewish land against the Jews. The Jewish people have first rights to
> Jewish land.
>
Same end. You don't get it, do you. It';s not yours, and never has beenentirely Hebrew even. RLa
> > "We"
> >will show "them" and all the rest of the world who oppose Zionism.>
>
> The "world" has no right to oppose zionism anymore than the "world" has
> the right to oppose French rights in France, Italian rights in Italy,
> German rights in Germany, or American rights on Indian lands. What if the
> UN passed a resolution calling for Kentuckians to get off Indian lands
> and go back to England and IReland? Actually, the UN would be more in
> their rights to do that than to tell JEws they cannot settle in Judea.
>
Bad world, bad, for having the temerity to cross you. So sorry, I'll go upto New York and tell them. Then they'll stop saying all those nasty things.
What do you suppose they meant, the UN that is, when they said:
"ZIONISM IS RACISM."
What could they have been thinking?
Roger Alexander
> >> > Interwoven with this is a much more complicated assertion that
> >> >>the Balfour declaration gave the Jews a legal right in the Land superior to that of the inhabitants. The Balfour declaration did not do so, but he ignores this. Of course, the inhabitants were not asked their pleasure before the imperial power temporarily governing them made such a declaration, and this destroys any legitimacy of the declaration.>
> >>
> >> First of all, since when do you have to ask squatter's permission to get back your property?>
>
> >A person is a squatter when he takes possession of land abandoned or notoccupied by a right ful owner. The Palestinians were never squatters, since there was never a Jewish rightful owner from whom they took possession.<
>
> That is the true anti-Jew talking, saying we never had a land and that
> the Bible is all a myth we put together to take away a New Jersey sized
> country from the Arabs. Why didn't we just spin a yarn together that we
> were the last of the Mohicans and just take away New York State instead?
> Why steal a land that is small and 60% desert? New York State is nice and
> green, with plenty of water. Why didn't we spend the last 3,000 years
> putting together a book to steal the Big Apple instead?
>
Now you are putting words in my mouth, and as Jimmy Durante said, "That is veryunsanitary." I note only that you didn't steal it. You robbed the owners. Theft and
robbery are different. Today, armed robbery gets a fellow a long sentence.
RLA
> >The term is here nonsense. But it is powerfully emotive. BTW, at law, if a person squats on the land for the statutory term, openly and notoriously, he gains the right to take title at the end of the period. The period is 21 years at common law, and about the same by statute in most jurisdictions.>
>
> You might be talking about English common law. That statute carries no
> weight in Jewish law which is applicable to Jewish lands. According to
> Jewish law, all land must revert to its original owners after 50 years
> (the Jubilee year). In effect, all lands are actually leased for 50 years
> (just as you lease a car) and are really owned by the clans of the tribes
> of Israel. There can be no squatters on the small Jewish lands that God
> in his infinite mercy granted us. God made sure to protect OUR rights by
> his merciful laws.
>
You have a very convenient God. he treats you differently and better than everyoneelse. What other parts of the world has he given you? I just want to know
so I can know where not to buy a house. RLa
> >
> ..........
> >Yeah, it's terrible that the native people of Palestine should oppose themaster race.<
>
> The Jewish story begins with a non-Jew, Adam, and the world is saved by
> another non-Jew, Noah. Thousands of years pass before the man we consider
> to be the first Jew, Abraham, arrives on the scene. Of course, Islam
> later called him the first Moslem since he was the father of Ishmael, the
> first "Arab." But there is no master race, only two people competing for
> the same land. But it is the Arabs who have chosen to try to supplant us
> and our religion, as they rewrote their books to nullify our rights, and
> planted their mosques on our soil. They consider THEMSELVES to be the
> master race, and are humiliated because God refuses to let them destroy a
> little people to who HE promised the little land.
>
I don't think so. The Palestinians dont' sak for much, just to be let alone ontheir own land and not dispossessed. It is called "quiet enjoyment". You are determined
to take it all. RLA
> >> I haven't really done justice to this short post. Garbuz never lets the truth interfere with
> >> >a good story, and he does it well.
> >> >Roger alexander>
> >>
> >> No one can spin a yarn better than a Kentucky shyster high on moonshine,
> >> but it is a challenge to dispel the duplicitous whoppers that you
> >> throw so well.
> >
> > In your dreams, Garbuz. You havve no support for your position.
> >The whole world takes the other side, except for the Zionists and
> >the ol' Uncle Sap.
> >Roger Alexander<
>
> I guess the Almighty will decide that in the final analysis, as HE is the
> the ultimate author and executioner of justice. What man proposes, God
> disposes. I'm happy that Uncle Sap has mostly gone along with its better
> instincts in supporting Jewish rights. Perhaps that is why it has been
> spared God's wrath in other matters. Just the opinion of a "torah
> thumper" to use your friend Matt's terminology.
Our instincts have been base. They relate to winning elections and
political survival in the face of Zionist influence. Ask Paul Findley,
or Jesse Helms.
Roger Alexander
Jack Garbuz
>>
>>The notion of "living space" certainly preceded the Nazis; nonetheless
>>they laid claim to territories that were outside the German homeland.
>>Israel IS the Jewish homeland, and it is the Arabs who came from their
>>homeland, Arabia, to occupy the lands of others who are the occupiers of
>>Jewish living space on Jewish territory.
>
>Yeah, and the National Socialists and their Aryan buddies also laid claim to th
>whole world as the Aryan birthright. This ideological flaw infests Israel's
>right-wing neo-Nazis.<
Bullshit. The Nazi ideology is based on world enslavement to the master
race. THe Jews only want their land back. However if the Arabs choose to
continue to impoverish themselves in this futile struggle they certainly
will end up the "hewers of wood and fetchers of water" as the Bible
predicts. But it is THEIR choice, not as the result of anything the Jews
do,
but as a result of God hardening their hearts as he did to Pharaoh.
>>If ever??? I don't know what sewer your antecedents crawled out of to
>>occupy Indian land, but mine had a great literature and a great history
>>before yours descended from the trees. >
>Also a knack for killing and displacing indigenous peoples "by the will
>of Yaweh." While my antecedents came from both oral and literary civilizations
>of Western, Eastern and Southern Africa, there is far less ancient blood on
>their hands. <
Pshaw, that's a good un :) First of all there were too many black nations
at
every level of development, and too little is known to make any such
silly broad assumptions. And much later, the warring black nations were
enslaving each other and selling each other off to the Arab slave
traders, and even later to the Portugese. As for Joshua's extermination
of the Canaanites, this was their punishment for their sacrificing little
children to Moloch, an act abominable in the eyes of God. The JEws did no
such thing to warrant extermination at the hands of the Germans and their
collaborators. However, I will admit that the participation of some
Jewish communists in the horrific collectivization drive in the Ukraine,
which caused the starvation of millions, was bad enough.
> The murder of women and children in war was considered a very
>dishonorable phage on the soul of an Congolese or Mozambiquan warrior prior to
>the introduction of the far more efficient techniques from Europe and Near
>Asia.<
And on what basis do you know all this? Is this "oral tradition" written
down somewhere? Or is most of it created out of thin air?
>>Heh, Israel faces numerical odds of at least 60 to 1 (300million arabs
>>vs. less than 5 million Jews). And it has a territory about the size of
>>New Jersey. If the US were to face comparable odds, it would be facing
>>60x260 million enemies, or 13.5 BILLION people, which is approximately
>>the population of over TEN Chinas. Now imagine the US surrounded on
>>three sides by 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, 9, 10 CHINAS!!! And on top of that,
>>imagine if 40% of the people INSIDE the US were enemies setting off
>>terrorist bombs! That is precisely Israel's position. No other country
>>even comes close to having to face such overwhelming odds.
>
>Numerical odds my ass--no military power considers that as a PRIMARY
>factor in the consideration of threat areas. The force levels in those
>countries, with the exception of Iraq and Iran, are negligible at that--and
>the only true direct foreign threat Israel faces at this current stage
>is from Syria. China is only formidable because of it's nuclear
>arms--otherwise,
>its land-forces are peacemeal and while huge, can still be dealt with in
>light of both our technological and experience advantages. <
Is that a fact? Tell it to the American survivors of the Pusan Peninsula
during the Korean War when the Chinese and the North Koreans fought the
US and the UN to a standstill.
> Likewise, China
>lacks a significant air power mechanism, making the People's Army several
>times more vulnerable than even Iraqs. Only the strategic threat the People's
>Republic can put up is significant--from the tactical attrition point of
>view, we're more than capable of holding our own.<
Ha. That is what the Germans said of the Russian before WWII. First of
all, China is way too large to be conquered by the US short of being
devastated by nuclear weapons.
The Japanese tried it from 1934 and China tied down most of the Japanese
army all through WWII, just as most GErmans were tied down in Russia. If
the US had had to face the full armed force of both Japan and Germany,
otherwise tied down by Russia and China, the US probably would have lost.
Regarding the Desert Shield, it was nice of Saddam to hunker down and
wait for the US to build up its armed forces over a period of over 6
months, setting up the
chess board perfectly. However, his army was mostly useless because they
fought only out of fear of Saddam and not out of any conviction.
Don't expect anyone else to give the US the same break again, of just
sitting around doing nothing while the US positions every man and woman
in perfect barbie doll positioning for the eventual attack.
>Israel has time and time demonstrated its military superiority over her
>neighbors; and of the nation's that "pledged" to destroy her, only
>Jordan, Syria, and Egypt (two of which have disembarked that path) posed
>any significant hostility--Saudia Arabia, Iraq, and Lebanon (which in itself
>can be defaulted from any sort of consideration as a "nation"), half-heartedly
>participated in 1948 and were quite involved in their own affairs to pay
>anything more than lip service to the Palestinian cause.<
In 1973, on the Golan Heights, was fought the second largest tank battle
in
history, second only to the battle of Kursk in which thousands of Russian
and German tanks faced each other in WWII. It wasn't "easy." It only
looks
easy in retrospect. Unlike the US, Israel does not have the luxury of
being
able to waste months to position everything just perfectly. Within 3
hours,
Israeli reservists must have left their jobs, homes or wherever they
happen
to be, grab a car, a taxi, a bus or whatever, and be with their units
hopefully just in time to perhaps stop a Syrian incursion into Tiberius.
There is no room for guessing or luck. Israel's "demonstration of
superiority" has been very costly to every Israeli family that has a
father,
sons and even girls who must give ten percent of their lives to the army,
not to mention one of the highest tax rates in the world.
>Population pressure is a factor in war, but it's hardly a factor in defining
>the outcome of a war. Japan was up against the most populous nation in
>the East, and they kicked collective asses of the Manchu-Chinese sorry excuse
>for a military from Manchuko to Nanking, burning their way from Peiping to
>Burma and Southeast Asia. Britain screwed over a third of the world, literally
>bringing truth to the expression "the sun never sets on the British empire.">
Yes but despite the spectacular early victories, the Japanese still had
over
2/3rds of
their army tied down in China for the remainder of the war, which was
fortunate for the US.
>>The ONLY reason Israel was chose by the "zionists" is that it is Jewish
>>soil, the Jewish homeland. There is no other rational reason for wanting
>>to settle there. Home is where the heart is. It is unfortunate that this
>>is not recognized by the myriad of Arabs and other Jew haters, but that
>>still doesn't change the fact that it is our land.
>
>It's also Christian homeland, by your reasoning. <
I give up. How is it the Christian homeland, by my reasoning? True, the
Crusaders did run a christian state there for nearly two centuries, but
their lands and fiefdoms were in Europe, and eventually they went home.
The
Christian and Moslem connections to our soil are only incidental, in that
in
the former case, the son of God, having a Jewish mother, was born there,
and, in the latter case, the Prophet had a dream in which he migrated
from
Arabia to the Temple Mount one night and from there ascended to the
seventh
heaven, and then got home to Arabia just in time to greet the dawn.
Otherwise, there is no intrinsic connection between those people and
Jewish
soil. Which do you feel more connected to, African soil or to Israeli
soil?
Are you a Christian or a Moslem (I'm going on a hunch that you aren't
Jewish)?
>Unless you can discover
>any reason why a claim is recognized because of religious edict (rather than
>influence and military might), then you're spouting useless, dishonest, and
>pointless garbage.>
The Jewish people are a nation, not just a religion. They are like the
Celts
or the
Masai.
><Garbuz continues define Arabs--with little regard for historical fact--as
>squatters, poachers, and thieves. Considering the obvious retort to such
>an outlandish argument, I discontinue my reply here.>
I define those Arabs who are occupying Jewish land as squatters. SOme may
or
may not be thieves. There are plenty of Jewish thieves living there too.
The Badass Reverend Prez
In article <60knd1$1...@mtinsc03.worldnet.att.net>, JGA...@worldnet.att.net
says...
>
>The notion of "living space" certainly preceded the Nazis; nonetheless
>they laid claim to territories that were outside the German homeland.
>Israel IS the Jewish homeland, and it is the Arabs who came from their
>homeland, Arabia, to occupy the lands of others who are the occupiers of
>Jewish living space on Jewish territory.
Yeah, and the National Socialists and their Aryan buddies also laid claim to th
whole world as the Aryan birthright. This ideological flaw infests Israel's
right-wing neo-Nazis.
>If ever??? I don't know what sewer your antecedents crawled out of to
>occupy Indian land, but mine had a great literature and a great history
>before yours descended from the trees.
Also a knack for killing and displacing indigenous peoples "by the will
of Yaweh." While my antecedents came from both oral and literary civilizations
of Western, Eastern and Southern Africa, there is far less ancient blood on
their hands. The murder of women and children in war was considered a very
dishonorable phage on the soul of an Congolese or Mozambiquan warrior prior to
the introduction of the far more efficient techniques from Europe and Near
Asia.
>Heh, Israel faces numerical odds of at least 60 to 1 (300million arabs
>vs. less than 5 million Jews). And it has a territory about the size of
>New Jersey. If the US were to face comparable odds, it would be facing
>60x260 million enemies, or 13.5 BILLION people, which is approximately
>the population of over TEN Chinas. Now imagine the US surrounded on
>three sides by 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, 9, 10 CHINAS!!! And on top of that,
>imagine if 40% of the people INSIDE the US were enemies setting off
>terrorist bombs! That is precisely Israel's position. No other country
>even comes close to having to face such overwhelming odds.
Numerical odds my ass--no military power considers that as a PRIMARY
factor in the consideration of threat areas. The force levels in those
countries, with the exception of Iraq and Iran, are negligible at that--and
the only true direct foreign threat Israel faces at this current stage
is from Syria. China is only formidable because of it's nuclear
arms--otherwise,
its land-forces are peacemeal and while huge, can still be dealt with in
light of both our technological and experience advantages. Likewise, China
lacks a significant air power mechanism, making the People's Army several
times more vulnerable than even Iraqs. Only the strategic threat the People's
Republic can put up is significant--from the tactical attrition point of
view, we're more than capable of holding our own.
Israel has time and time demonstrated its military superiority over her
neighbors; and of the nation's that "pledged" to destroy her, only
Jordan, Syria, and Egypt (two of which have disembarked that path) posed
any significant hostility--Saudia Arabia, Iraq, and Lebanon (which in itself
can be defaulted from any sort of consideration as a "nation"), half-heartedly
participated in 1948 and were quite involved in their own affairs to pay
anything more than lip service to the Palestinian cause.
Population pressure is a factor in war, but it's hardly a factor in defining
the outcome of a war. Japan was up against the most populous nation in
the East, and they kicked collective asses of the Manchu-Chinese sorry excuse
for a military from Manchuko to Nanking, burning their way from Peiping to
Burma and Southeast Asia. Britain screwed over a third of the world, literally
bringing truth to the expression "the sun never sets on the British empire."
>The ONLY reason Israel was chose by the "zionists" is that it is Jewish
>soil, the Jewish homeland. There is no other rational reason for wanting
>to settle there. Home is where the heart is. It is unfortunate that this
>is not recognized by the myriad of Arabs and other Jew haters, but that
>still doesn't change the fact that it is our land.
It's also Christian homeland, by your reasoning. Unless you can discover
any reason why a claim is recognized because of religious edict (rather than
influence and military might), then you're spouting useless, dishonest, and
pointless garbage.
<Garbuz continues define Arabs--with little regard for historical fact--as
squatters, poachers, and thieves. Considering the obvious retort to such
an outlandish argument, I discontinue my reply here.>
-The Reverend Prez
Gary Rumain
William Wallace (WWal...@freedom.org) wrote:
:
: He does fancy himself a propagandist although an embarassin
: amateur.
Well, most people are, when compared to you.
Susan Cohen
--
"Those who study history are doomed to watch others repeat it."
Gary Rumain
William Wallace (William...@freedom.org) wrote:
: On 28 Sep 1997 16:00:26 GMT, Jack Garbuz <JGA...@worldnet.att.net>
: wrote:
:
: >>On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 03:09:55 -0500, Roger Alexander
: >>>Garbuz ridicules this assertion, making the incredible claim that: "It is the
: >>>Arabs
: >>>who sought Lebensraum in the little Jewish country."
:
: >> He does fancy himself a propagandist although an embarassin
: >>amateur. >
: >And you are an embarrassing Fuehrer wannabe. Why don't you just climb
:
: You wish to make it that simple but it is not that. Only a jew
: would pretend to believe such a thing. But as they know they are lying
: they know they are bearing false witness. But since that is not a
: violation of law except when towards a fellow jew they continue in
: their lies.
Boy, you really are a whacko!
Yehuda Igor Yeroslavski
Roger Alexander (rla...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
<skipped>
: THECRUX OF THE PRESENT PROBLEM WITH ZIONISM IS THAT
: IT RULES ISRAEL, AND THAT THE IDEOLOGY PREVENTS ANY
: PEACE SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE ISARELIS AND THE PALESTINIANS
: BECAUSE THE IDEOLOGY REQUIRES THE PALESTINIANS TO LEAVE
: PALESTINE.
: I put the above in caps because I believe here is the heart of the present matter,
: not some abstruse argument about ancestors.
: RLA
<skipped>
Racist post which slander peacefull nature of zionism
I=P
Jack Garbuz
The Arabs are an interloping minority squatting
>> on JEwish land. They have the same rights as any minority people, but
>> definitely no more than that. Certainly not national rights on Jewish
>> soil.
>>
>I'm not talking Biblical nonsense, but serious scholarship. See Palestine and IsraelA Challenge to Justice by John Quigley and his=
references. <
Why don't you save me some trouble and quote some evidence of his
assertions.
The native Palestinians
>were there when the Hebrews came the first (recorded) time. When the arab (pre-Muslim)
>civilization came to them, they adopted it. When the Muslims (also Arabs) came,
>they adopted Islam. They have continuously resided (some of them) in Palestine
>longer than the Hebrews.<
Total bullshit. Utter, total bullshit.
> And since you have no Hebrew blood (or damned little)
>you don't even have the claim of blood. You truly is sucks, Garbuz.>
Both Jews and Arabs have the blood of Abraham, but their place is on the
other side of the Jordan river.
>> > When the Arabs came they adopted the Arab culture. So their invasion of the Land occurred before that of the hebrews, from
whom your laughable calim comes. The fact that the Arab culture comes
from Arabia, If it is fact, doesn't mean that all the Arabs came from
there.<>>
>> Besides Jews, who remained the majority until the Arabs came in the 7th
>> century, there were non-Jews who were descendents of Samaritans who had
>> inhabited Samaria (which was the old Kingdom of Israel destroyed by
>> Sargon who carried the ten tribes into captivity). The coming of Arab
>> conquerors in the 7th century tipped the population scales for sure.
>>
>
>Yes, jack, some Jews lived in Palestine for all those years. Many of these peopleabhor the Zionists and all their works.>
The ultraorthodox are antizionist; that is their right. But that does not
mean that they renounce the connection between the Jews and their
homeland. They simply believe that the reconnection has to be made by the
Messiah.
> THECRUX OF THE PRESENT PROBLEM WITH ZIONISM IS THAT
>IT RULES ISRAEL, AND THAT THE IDEOLOGY PREVENTS ANY
>PEACE SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE ISARELIS AND THE PALESTINIANS
>BECAUSE THE IDEOLOGY REQUIRES THE PALESTINIANS TO LEAVE
>PALESTINE.
> I put the above in caps because I believe here is the heart of the present matter,
>not some abstruse argument about ancestors.
>RLA>
No, it never required the Arabs leave, except for those who resist the
right of the Jews to come. The crux of the problem is the resistance to
Jews coming, not that Arabs are being forced to leave. As usual, you have
it precisely backwards.
>> At any rate, over 40 percent of Israelis are of
>> middle eastern origin, from Yemen, Morocco, Iraq, Egypt, etc., so your
>> racist attempt to split off those European Jews who were raped but
>> nevertheless remained true to their culture from their ancient roots is
>> as futile as it is despicable.
>>
>
>This remark cannot be parsed so is left. But if you mean that some Jews have Hebrewroots, that may well be. Even if all Jews were=
direct descendants of Hebrews, and even
>if the world agreed that the exile were a present illegality which demanded redress,
>still nothing would be resolved by the forcefuldispossession of people who had lived
>in the Land coextensively with the original Hebrews, and who remained for 2000
>years. I seriously doubt that there is a scholar of international law alive who would
>champion your argument. RLa>
Certainly the Yemenite Jews have a very large probability of closer
genetic ties to the ancient Hebrews, but in general, most Jews are
genetically more related to each other than to the peoples amongst whom
they dwelled. Certainly there were converts who married Jews and thus
became Jews, and there were rapes, etc., which accounts for the general
resemblance of Jews to the native majority populations. But the blood
line going back, though diluted, still exists.
And as I have said many times, it is not a question of dispossessing the
Arabs. They have the right to stay, but they cannot resist the right of
Jews to buy and live in properties anywhere in Israel, Judah and Samaria.
The principle of Judenrein cannot be applied to Jewish soil. Perhaps the
Saudis, or the Jordanians, or other Arab states have the right to keep
Jews or Christians out. But there is no way that Arab squatters in Judah
and Samaria can keep Jews out. And if they continue to try, it is they
who will be out.
>> > The only foundation
>> >for the Israeli claim is that they took it from the Arabs. Possession is nine points
>> >of the law, but the ethical claim is nil.>
>>
>> The settled and fought courageously for what was theirs in the first
>> place.
>
>Again no proof, just bald assertion of falsehood, romantic yes, but falsehoodall the same.
>
>> They faced off Arab army after army alone, with no outside aid
>> except in 1973 when there was an airlift from the US. But by the time the new US arms arrived, the battlefield had already been s=
tabilized. Britain
>> and the Soviet Union had had more aid during WWII against Germany then
>> Israel had fighting alone against 100 to 1 odds in 1947, 1956, 1967 and
>> 1973. So that "possession" has not come easy.>>
>So would you agree that if the germans had won WW II, they would have been entitledto keep the land they won? Sounds mighty like =
the same thing. Might makes right. Israel Uber Alles!
>RLa <
Germans have a right to GErmany and Jews have the right to Eretz Yisrael.
If the Germans had conquered and settled GErmany with GErman people, I'd
have no problem with that. But GErmans conquering OTHER countries is a
very different kettle of fish.
>> That you know nothing, and are patently ignorant of history, should be
>> obvious.
>
>I'll match your ignorance against mine any day.<
Yup, I bet your ignorance is bigger than my ignorance.
----huge pile of RLA BS deleted -----
>> >The term is here nonsense. But it is powerfully emotive. BTW, at law, if a person squats on the land for the statutory term, o=
penly and notoriously, he gains the right to take title at the end of the period. The period is 21 years at common law, and about t=
he same by statute in most jurisdictions.>
>>
>> You might be talking about English common law. That statute carries no
>> weight in Jewish law which is applicable to Jewish lands. According to
>> Jewish law, all land must revert to its original owners after 50 years
>> (the Jubilee year). In effect, all lands are actually leased for 50 years
>> (just as you lease a car) and are really owned by the clans of the tribes
>> of Israel. There can be no squatters on the small Jewish lands that God
>> in his infinite mercy granted us. God made sure to protect OUR rights by
>> his merciful laws.
>>
>
>You have a very convenient God. he treats you differently and better than everyoneelse. What other parts of the world has he give=
n you? I just want to know so I can know where not to buy a house. RLa<
Our rabbis taught us that the reason why Genesis begins with "In the
beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" was to tell us that He
gives and takes lands as He chooses. He chose to give this little land to
the Jews, and will overturn the billons that come against Him. And HE has
definitely not given us any other territories except for Gilead and
Bashan which Israel has ceded to Jordan by making a treaty of peace with
Jordan. As for you not buying a house, watch out not to by in Hurst,
TExas where I understand the county took away 100 or more homes to make
room for an expanding shopping center. In Israel zionism still edges out
shopping malls, but alas not for long.
.
>> >Yeah, it's terrible that the native people of Palestine should oppose themaster race.<
>>
>> The Jewish story begins with a non-Jew, Adam, and the world is saved by
>> another non-Jew, Noah. Thousands of years pass before the man we consider
>> to be the first Jew, Abraham, arrives on the scene. Of course, Islam
>> later called him the first Moslem since he was the father of Ishmael, the
>> first "Arab." But there is no master race, only two people competing for
>> the same land. But it is the Arabs who have chosen to try to supplant us
>> and our religion, as they rewrote their books to nullify our rights, and
>> planted their mosques on our soil. They consider THEMSELVES to be the
>> master race, and are humiliated because God refuses to let them destroy a
>> little people to who HE promised the little land.
>>
>I don't think so. The Palestinians dont' sak for much, just to be let alone ontheir own land and not dispossessed. It is called "=
quiet enjoyment". You are determined to take it all. RLA>
The Arabs have always known they are living on Jewish land, because they
always saw Jews in their midst, and hundreds of years ago even blocked up
the entrance to Jerusalem through which, legend has it, the Messiah would
return. They don't ask for much; they ask for all, or nothing. They have
refused to acknowledge Jewish rights to their land bacause they have
always know that that negates their own rights to the land. SO like a
gambler playing with money found in the street, they have always been
prepared to play "all or nothing" because they are gambling with that
which wasn't theirs in the first place.
Roger Alexander
Yehuda Igor Yeroslavski wrote:
> Roger Alexander (rla...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
>
> <skipped>
>
> : THECRUX OF THE PRESENT PROBLEM WITH ZIONISM IS THAT
> : IT RULES ISRAEL, AND THAT THE IDEOLOGY PREVENTS ANY
> : PEACE SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE ISARELIS AND THE PALESTINIANS
> : BECAUSE THE IDEOLOGY REQUIRES THE PALESTINIANS TO LEAVE
> : PALESTINE.
> : I put the above in caps because I believe here is the heart of the present matter,
> : not some abstruse argument about ancestors.
> : RLA
>
> <skipped>
>
> Racist post which slander peacefull nature of zionism
>
> I=P
Zionism is one of the most murderous, racist, dishonest and otherwise dishonorable
ideologies ever to hit the world stage. It ranks right behind Nazism and Communism
(you pick which of the above is worst) and just before Scientology as an awful
mindbending ideology.
To slander this cultlike ideology, one would have to find something to say so awful
that the mind cannot conceive it. Once one says it is not as bad as the Nazis, yet sharing
many of the Nazi characteristics one has been too kind.
Roger Alexander
Yehuda Igor Yeroslavski
Roger Alexander (rla...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: Yehuda Igor Yeroslavski wrote:
: > Roger Alexander (rla...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: >
: > <skipped>
: >
: > : THECRUX OF THE PRESENT PROBLEM WITH ZIONISM IS THAT
: > : IT RULES ISRAEL, AND THAT THE IDEOLOGY PREVENTS ANY
: > : PEACE SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE ISARELIS AND THE PALESTINIANS
: > : BECAUSE THE IDEOLOGY REQUIRES THE PALESTINIANS TO LEAVE
: > : PALESTINE.
: > : I put the above in caps because I believe here is the heart of the present matter,
: > : not some abstruse argument about ancestors.
: > : RLA
: >
: > <skipped>
: >
: > Racist post which slander peacefull nature of zionism
: >
: > I=P
: Zionism is one of the most murderous, racist, dishonest and otherwise dishonorable
: ideologies ever to hit the world stage. It ranks right behind Nazism and Communism
: (you pick which of the above is worst) and just before Scientology as an awful
: mindbending ideology.
: To slander this cultlike ideology, one would have to find something to say so awful
: that the mind cannot conceive it. Once one says it is not as bad as the Nazis, yet sharing
: many of the Nazi characteristics one has been too kind.
: Roger Alexander
ANTIZIONISM = RACISM
rogeralexandrism = lowlife nazism
Peacefull Zionism will prevail!
Igal=Superpeacemaker
Roger Alexander
Yehuda Igor Yeroslavski wrote:
> Roger Alexander (rla...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
>
> : Yehuda Igor Yeroslavski wrote:
>
> : > Roger Alexander (rla...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
> : >
> : > <skipped>
> : >
> : > : THECRUX OF THE PRESENT PROBLEM WITH ZIONISM IS THAT
> : > : IT RULES ISRAEL, AND THAT THE IDEOLOGY PREVENTS ANY
> : > : PEACE SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE ISARELIS AND THE PALESTINIANS
> : > : BECAUSE THE IDEOLOGY REQUIRES THE PALESTINIANS TO LEAVE
> : > : PALESTINE.
> : > : I put the above in caps because I believe here is the heart of the present matter,
> : > : not some abstruse argument about ancestors.
> : > : RLA
> : >
> : > <skipped>
> : >
> : > Racist post which slander peacefull nature of zionism
> : >
> : > I=P
>
> : Zionism is one of the most murderous, racist, dishonest and otherwise dishonorable
> : ideologies ever to hit the world stage. It ranks right behind Nazism and Communism
> : (you pick which of the above is worst) and just before Scientology as an awful
> : mindbending ideology.
> : To slander this cultlike ideology, one would have to find something to say so awful
> : that the mind cannot conceive it. Once one says it is not as bad as the Nazis, yet sharing
> : many of the Nazi characteristics one has been too kind.
> : Roger Alexander
>
> ANTIZIONISM = RACISM
>
> rogeralexandrism = lowlife nazism
>
> Peacefull Zionism will prevail!
>
> Igal=Superpeacemaker
I get it. You can read. And you have read 1984. So you figure that making up
Big Brotherisms will work on an unsuspecting populace. And then again,
maybe not. Meantime, you have yet to put forth any ideas.
Roger Alexander
Roger Alexander
mad...@erols.com wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Sven.No...@inka.de (Sven Noltemeier) wrote:
>
> >Abusnaineh <sna...@peace.hut> wrote:
> >
> >>> Nu, what do we expect of people who are proud of their sons blowing
> >>> themselves to pieces, murdering woman and children ?
> >
> >>Nobody is happy for the death of their children.
> >
> >I've heard otherwise from Arab propagandists.
> >
> >>And if you are the same Sven that sent me the email, you really are very
> >>sick.
> >
> >Me sending you email ? No, I don't want private contact with you.
> >Maybe it was the real Shabatai Zvi who sent it, or you are
> >hallucinating, as usual. Prozac overdose ?
> >
> >Sven
> >
> Very likely. But then he should give some to his supporter nazi want
> to be RLA, who is in dire need of it.
> mad...@erols.com
Again, Mark, you open with the ol' ad hominem. It is obvious you lack the
intelligence to do better.
Roger alexander
mad...@erols.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Sven.No...@inka.de (Sven Noltemeier) wrote:
>Abusnaineh <sna...@peace.hut> wrote:
>
>>> Nu, what do we expect of people who are proud of their sons blowing
>>> themselves to pieces, murdering woman and children ?
>
>>Nobody is happy for the death of their children.
>
>I've heard otherwise from Arab propagandists.
>
>>And if you are the same Sven that sent me the email, you really are very
>>sick.
>
>Me sending you email ? No, I don't want private contact with you.
>Maybe it was the real Shabatai Zvi who sent it, or you are
>hallucinating, as usual. Prozac overdose ?
>
>Sven
>
Very likely. But then he should give some to his supporter nazi want
to be RLA, who is in dire need of it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBNDGEtQ2NH8urM3q5AQEKMgH9FIn/DS8vf/sHgJxNqsATu0cS4Wedd4gd
Kj96RQkM83wTwCpbCYoAs+FEWY5jfEHPVa9eIAARMp/cOOJOoglwmw==
=P3re
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jack Garbuz
>> : Zionism is one of the most murderous, racist, dishonest and otherwise dishonorable
>> : ideologies ever to hit the world stage. It ranks right behind Nazism and Communism
>> : (you pick which of the above is worst) and just before Scientology as an awful
>> : mindbending ideology.
>> : To slander this cultlike ideology, one would have to find something to say so awful
>> : that the mind cannot conceive it. Once one says it is not as bad as the Nazis, yet sharing
>> : many of the Nazi characteristics one has been too kind.
>> : Roger Alexander>>
Zionism is the Jewish struggle for dignity and for its soil in the face
of murderous world that is never satisfied with drinking Jewish blood. It
needs Jewish blood to satiate its insatiable hatred. It continuously
needs to sacrifice the Jews on a bloody altar to purge its murderous
soul. Zionism says "NO" and backs it up by taking the blood of those who
come to murder us instead. You and Giwer and all you bloodthirsty savages
can't DEAL with Jews who kill back. Moses and Joshua were two of the
earliest zionists: One gave us the Law of Life, the other gave us the
sword of Death to cut off the heads of Satan's children who stand to take
our blood. Those who are at peace with Israel will prosper and find God;
those who are Satan's children will be sent to their father in HELL!
The Badass Reverend Prez
In article <60t2nk$a...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, JGA...@worldnet.att.net
says...
>
>Zionism is the Jewish struggle for dignity and for its soil in the face
>of murderous world that is never satisfied with drinking Jewish blood. It
>needs Jewish blood to satiate its insatiable hatred. It continuously
>needs to sacrifice the Jews on a bloody altar to purge its murderous
>soul. Zionism says "NO" and backs it up by taking the blood of those who
>come to murder us instead. You and Giwer and all you bloodthirsty savages
>can't DEAL with Jews who kill back. Moses and Joshua were two of the
>earliest zionists: One gave us the Law of Life, the other gave us the
>sword of Death to cut off the heads of Satan's children who stand to take
>our blood. Those who are at peace with Israel will prosper and find God;
>those who are Satan's children will be sent to their father in HELL!
Well, if that ain't puttin' yourself up on a pedestal. Lose six million, and
you suddenly think your people are the most persecuted in the world. Sounds
like P.C.'s hypocrisy is coming to bear--condeming conspiracies while
spreading bullshit like this.
Get this through your head, Garbuz--life ain't fair. Jews aren't
the only people who have been persecuted, and their culture has been
on the hilt side of the sword a fair number of times. Welcome to reality.
Atrocities happen, and we try to learn from them. Guess what, I can
think of two million people in Cambodia who died without thinking, "Gee,
I wish I could go out and kill a Jew!" While the Holocaust was indeed
atrocious, there are people in the world who weren't involved and have
there OWN problems to worry about.
Stop acting like the poster-child of suffering and grow up; if Zionism has
any sort of historical and moral justification other than "might makes right,"
then I'll eat a Cyrix chip. Don't give me your "G-D SAYS SO" crap or
some back-ass-wards philosophical rant about Jewish suffering either. If
the Holocaust is any justification for the displacement of another people,
then get the hell out of America. I'm claiming this land for Blacks
everywhere.
Punkass motherfucker...
-The Reverend Prez
The Badass Reverend Prez
>earliest zionists: One gave us the Law of Life, the other gave us the
>sword of Death to cut off the heads of Satan's children who stand to take
>our blood. Those who are at peace with Israel will prosper and find God;
>those who are Satan's children will be sent to their father in HELL!
One other thing. Moses and Joshua were murdering thieves who
"in the name of God," killed men women and children WITHOUT provocation.
Rear your own fucking Torah--there's nothing about some great Jerichoan
injustice committed against Israel, other than the fact they existed.
Amazing what double-standards rabid Zionists like yourself live by, claiming
the attempted genocide against your people was wrong while rejoicing in the
fruits of the SUCCESSFUL genocide your "ancestors" inflicted taking
Palestine. If Jews are the victims of Nazi Germany, then the Canaanites,
the Jebusites, the Perizzites, the Amorites, the Amalekites, and the ORIGINAL
inhabitants of the land are the victims of the equally facist and barbaric
Hebrews.
This is, of course, using your own logic, fucker.
-The Reverend Prez
The Badass Reverend Prez
In article <60rkqo$stg$1...@morgoth.sfu.ca>, yyer...@sfu.ca says...
>
>ANTIZIONISM = RACISM
Wow, guess it's not a function, considering Anti-Zionism's antithesis is also
equivalent to racism.
>Igal=Superpeacemaker
Igal=Cumshot his momma should've swallowed...
-The Reverend Prez
Jack Garbuz
Get this through your head, Garbuz--life ain't fair.<
It's been too fair to you, that's for sure.
> Jews aren't
>the only people who have been persecuted, and their culture has been
>on the hilt side of the sword a fair number of times. Welcome to reality.
>Atrocities happen, and we try to learn from them.<
Tell me about it. So, what have you learned?
> Guess what, I can
>think of two million people in Cambodia who died without thinking, "Gee,
>I wish I could go out and kill a Jew!" While the Holocaust was indeed
>atrocious, there are people in the world who weren't involved and have
>there OWN problems to worry about.<
So why don't they bother the Cambodians about their homeland? WHy are
they messing with the Jews?
>
>Stop acting like the poster-child of suffering and grow up; if Zionism has
>any sort of historical and moral justification other than "might makes right,"
>then I'll eat a Cyrix chip. <
You can start with my 586, if you get me an AMD K6 in exchange.
> Don't give me your "G-D SAYS SO" crap or
>some back-ass-wards philosophical rant about Jewish suffering either. <
Take it light, homey. Steven Spielberg just made a new film about the
black holocaust (slavery) soon to be released, just to give y'all equal
time. Go see his film and give that Jew mo' money.
> If
>the Holocaust is any justification for the displacement of another people, then get the hell out of America. I'm claiming this land for Blacks everywhere.<
I'll go wherever the hell I want, when I want to, bro. And you can claim
any shit you want, if you can git it. Anyhow, ain't a continent and a
half enough for y'all? I think there are 30 or more black countries in
Africa, Latin AMerica and the Caribbean. Is there a problem with
lebensraum?
>Punkass motherfucker...>
Fuck you motherfucker, and up yours for the NEw Year.
Jack Garbuz
>One other thing. Moses and Joshua were murdering thieves who
>"in the name of God," killed men women and children WITHOUT provocation.
>Rear your own fucking Torah--there's nothing about some great Jerichoan
>injustice committed against Israel, other than the fact they existed.
>Amazing what double-standards rabid Zionists like yourself live by, claiming
>the attempted genocide against your people was wrong while rejoicing in the
>fruits of the SUCCESSFUL genocide your "ancestors" inflicted taking
>Palestine. <
No we took Canaan and wiped out child murderers. A fit punishment; all
child murderers should be put to death!
> If Jews are the victims of Nazi Germany, then the Canaanites,
>the Jebusites, the Perizzites, the Amorites, the Amalekites, and the ORIGINAL
>inhabitants of the land are the victims of the equally facist and barbaric
>Hebrews.>
Then you should erect a holocaust museum to the Canaanites, mofo, and
let their curses from God be on your head.
>This is, of course, using your own logic, fucker.>
No, I use fucking logic, a-hole.
William Wallace
On Mon, 29 Sep 1997 07:15:30 -0500, Roger Alexander
<rla...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>William Wallace wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 03:09:55 -0500, Roger Alexander
>> <rla...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> >Jack Garbuz wrote:
>> >> >>The solution is simple.
>> >> >>Any Arabs who can't stand to have Jews as neigbors can leave and go
>> >> >>elsewhere.
>> >> > Or they can shoot them. It makes no difference when they are
>> >> >intent upon intenting implementing Lebensraum as a policy and are
>> >> >importing Russians to make it impossible to end that policy, thus
>> >> >making peace impossible. >
>> >>
>> >> Don't be ridiculous. It is the Arabs who sought "lebensraum" in the
>> >> little Jewish country. There were barely 500,000 of them when the Balfour
>> >> was issued in 1917 vs. 15 million Jews, whereas today there are 6 million
>> >> of them . By contrast the world Jewish population is less today than it
>> >> was during WWI. They have twenty-one (21) states spread over an area
>> >> larger than the US. They don't let Jews leben. That's the problem.
>>
>> > I have tried to approach Garbuz's posts from the POV of logical flaws.
>> >It is hard, because there is little logic, and a lot of emotion. Let's try,
>> >though.
>>
>> > Lebensraum as a notion comes from the Nazi, treated as language.
>> >It means the notion that the Germans needed (and by implication, deserved)
>> >living room at the expense of their neighbors (both to the East and to the
>> >West).
>>
>> In fact if you look at the references to Lebensraum in the
>> speeches you find it is only to the East. There is no mention of to
>> the west, ever. If you look at the explicite writings rather than the
>> speeches the claim is based solely upon a numeric ratio of population
>> to square kilometers.
>I am aware of this. I included the Westerly direction to make it clear
>thatGermany wanted back Alsace and Lorraine. RLA
Alsace and Lorraine changed hands depending upon who won the war.
The districts were populated with both German and French partisans who
cheered on their side. This goes back at least to 1830 that I am aware
of from family history.
It is nothing unique to WW II and did not need be mentioned as
they were the expected spoils of victory.
>> In practice the only clear objective of it was to retake the
>> Ukraine. The Ukraine was a slave state of the Russian empire and at
>> worst it would have only changed rulers. In fact, the communists had
>> murdered some 10 Million of them and suppressed their religion.
>> Clearly they viewed Hitler as their savior from the Bolsheviks.
> Here you rewrite history. The Germans had only contempt for all the Slavs.
>Their treatment of the Ukrainians was so bad that they revolted and thus
>caused the Germans a lot of problems contributing to their final defeat.
>The Nazis were worse than the zionists, by far.
The Ukraine had a large indigenous population of German speaking
people.
As to how the Ukranians were treated, there are communist claims
as to that treatment. But when you read "recountings" from holocasust
survivors you find regular references to Ukrainians as though they
were the devil's henchmen, the partners in crime with the Nazis.
"Wild Ukrainian" is one description that comes to mind. The rest
of the story is improbable, URL by email if you wish. Our jewish
brethren appear interested in painting them with the same brush as the
Nazis.
I suggest that only one version of the story can be true. Given
the communist origin of one version of it, I can not hold that version
as correct without extraordinary evidence that it is correct.
Jack Garbuz
>>>One other thing. Moses and Joshua were murdering thieves who
>>>"in the name of God," killed men women and children WITHOUT provocation.
>>>Rear your own fucking Torah--there's nothing about some great Jerichoan
>>>injustice committed against Israel, other than the fact they existed.
>>>Amazing what double-standards rabid Zionists like yourself live by, claiming
>>>the attempted genocide against your people was wrong while rejoicing in the
>>>fruits of the SUCCESSFUL genocide your "ancestors" inflicted taking
>>>Palestine. <
>
>>No we took Canaan and wiped out child murderers. A fit punishment; all
>>child murderers should be put to death!
>
>read your own professed history that is. >
You're sick. The story of Abraham's near sacrifice of Isaac is a
condemnation of the ancient practice. One of the hallmarks of our
religions was the cessation and condemnation of human sacrifice.
William Wallace
On 1 Oct 1997 23:45:36 GMT, Jack Garbuz <JGA...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>>One other thing. Moses and Joshua were murdering thieves who
>>"in the name of God," killed men women and children WITHOUT provocation.
>>Rear your own fucking Torah--there's nothing about some great Jerichoan
>>injustice committed against Israel, other than the fact they existed.
>>Amazing what double-standards rabid Zionists like yourself live by, claiming
>>the attempted genocide against your people was wrong while rejoicing in the
>>fruits of the SUCCESSFUL genocide your "ancestors" inflicted taking
>>Palestine. <
>No we took Canaan and wiped out child murderers. A fit punishment; all
>child murderers should be put to death!
And it was at one time an Israelite custom, if you ever intend to
read your own professed history that is.
Roger Alexander
William Wallace wrote:
Again, I am aware that some Ukrainians were used by the germans
as helpers in the slave camps. We have had a few of them sent out of
the country after the survivors came forward. But the best information
I have is what I posted above. If you havve references that contradict
it, let us all know.
Roger alexander
Roger Alexander
Jack Garbuz wrote:
> > Again, I am aware that some Ukrainians were used by the germans
> >as helpers in the slave camps. We have had a few of them sent out of
> >the country after the survivors came forward. But the best information
> >I have is what I posted above. If you havve references that contradict
> >it, let us all know.
> >Roger alexander>
>
> There had been little love lost between many Ukrainians and Jews since
> the eighteenth century peasant uprising led by Bogdan Chmielnicki against
> the Polish landlords (Pan) which also included the murder of some 175,000
> or more Jews who had been seen as mostly tax collectors for the Poles.
> There is also no doubt that the collectivization of the Ukraine of the
> 1930's culminated in the deaths of some 4-7 million Ukrainian peasants,
> and they blamed communist Jews for much of that, though that rap is
> overstated as Stalin was a Georgian, not a Jew. So, yes, for the most
> part Ukrainians did hail the arriving Germans as liberators, and
> Vlassov's army fought alonside against the Reds. THough many, many
> Ukrainians were responsible for the murder of many in my family and
> hundreds of thousands of other Jews, there were also those who rescued
> people like my mother. There is no point in holding on to ethnic grudges
> forever, and history should be presented in a balanced manner.
Thanks, jack. Would you say that the Germans queered their own deal,
by treating the Ukrainians like slaves? This was what I had read somewhere,
and that the Ukrainians then revolted and the Germans killed many of them.
I agree that balance and fairness is required in history. I have no axe to
grind
here.
Roger Alexander
Jack Garbuz
Jack Garbuz
> Thanks, jack. Would you say that the Germans queered their own deal,
>by treating the Ukrainians like slaves? This was what I had read somewhere,
>and that the Ukrainians then revolted and the Germans killed many of them.
>I agree that balance and fairness is required in history. I have no axe to
>grind
>here.
>Roger Alexander>
In all probability had they delayed implementation of their racial
policies they would have won the war.
Roger Alexander
Jack Garbuz wrote:
Welll, I don't know about that. But I think we generally agree that
the Germans were so racist that they hurt themselves. Israel could give this
one a thought now and then.
Roger Alexander
William Wallace
On 2 Oct 1997 06:28:04 GMT, Jack Garbuz <JGA...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>>>>One other thing. Moses and Joshua were murdering thieves who
>>>>"in the name of God," killed men women and children WITHOUT provocation.
>>>>Rear your own fucking Torah--there's nothing about some great Jerichoan
>>>>injustice committed against Israel, other than the fact they existed.
>>>>Amazing what double-standards rabid Zionists like yourself live by, claiming
>>>>the attempted genocide against your people was wrong while rejoicing in the
>>>>fruits of the SUCCESSFUL genocide your "ancestors" inflicted taking
>>>>Palestine. <
>>
>>>No we took Canaan and wiped out child murderers. A fit punishment; all
>>>child murderers should be put to death!
>>
>> And it was at one time an Israelite custom, if you ever intend to
>>read your own professed history that is. >
>
>You're sick. The story of Abraham's near sacrifice of Isaac is a
>condemnation of the ancient practice. One of the hallmarks of our
>religions was the cessation and condemnation of human sacrifice.
Please keep in mind that story is pure myth as are all the first
eleven books (at least) of the bible..
We are not really concerned with your nonsense posting crap.
Jack Garbuz
>
> I also clearly state there were never more that three million
>total jews under Nazi control at its greatest point of expansion. That
>is a known fact that anyone graduating from they fourth grade can
>establish by doing their sums.
>
> Shoah/disaster is a good word. I am not going to argue with that
>word. There is a lot more I will argue with as I know the subject and
>the nizkooks were kind enoough to edudate me. <
You're full of shit, as there were 3 million Jews in Poland alone.
Jack Garbuz
> Try to turn off all modern meanings of words.
>
> They were not racists in today's nasty sense.
>
> I am not saying they were good guys in any manner whatsoever. I
>am saying they were human beings and quite rational. >
Oh yes you love them and are one of them, a little frustrated Fuehrer who
missed his big chance.
> We now have over 70 senior officers in the Wehrmacht who were
>jews. Whe have uncounted junior officers and enlisted. >
Actually, its been said to me many times by your ilk that Hitler was
really a Jew and that the holocaust was just a JEwish plot concocted by
an evil Jewish mind. So why bother counting "Jewish" Wehrmacht officers.
Just say that the whole NASDP was just a bunch of friggin Jews and get it
over with. More Jewish troublemakers, those Nazis.
> Let me give you one simple fact. If you had converted to judaism
>at any time during Nazi rule there was no law that would have effected
>you. Not one. >
Yes Judaism was perfectly legal; only those who were racially Jewish had
to be exterminated. If Hitler put on a yarmulke and went to shul, no
problem. Oh, he was Jewish; ooops! So that's why he didn't go to shul.
William Wallace
>Jack Garbuz wrote:
Try to turn off all modern meanings of words.
They were not racists in today's nasty sense.
I am not saying they were good guys in any manner whatsoever. I
am saying they were human beings and quite rational.
We now have over 70 senior officers in the Wehrmacht who were
jews. Whe have uncounted junior officers and enlisted.
If you look at the actual laws that were passed, there were so
many exceptions as to raise a national scandal if it were to happen
these days. If there had been an opposition party they would have been
excoriated for the exceptions.
Let me give you one simple fact. If you had converted to judaism
at any time during Nazi rule there was no law that would have effected
you. Not one.
=====
William Wallace
>
>
>William Wallace wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 29 Sep 1997 07:15:30 -0500, Roger Alexander
>> <rla...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>> >William Wallace wrote:
>>
>> >> On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 03:09:55 -0500, Roger Alexander
>> >> <rla...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> >Jack Garbuz wrote:
>>
>> >> In practice the only clear objective of it was to retake the
>> >> Ukraine. The Ukraine was a slave state of the Russian empire and at
>> >> worst it would have only changed rulers. In fact, the communists had
>> >> murdered some 10 Million of them and suppressed their religion.
>> >> Clearly they viewed Hitler as their savior from the Bolsheviks.
>>
>> > Here you rewrite history. The Germans had only contempt for all the Slavs.
>> >Their treatment of the Ukrainians was so bad that they revolted and thus
>> >caused the Germans a lot of problems contributing to their final defeat.
>> >The Nazis were worse than the zionists, by far.
>>
>> The Ukraine had a large indigenous population of German speaking
>> people.
>>
>> As to how the Ukranians were treated, there are communist claims
>> as to that treatment. But when you read "recountings" from holocasust
>> survivors you find regular references to Ukrainians as though they
>> were the devil's henchmen, the partners in crime with the Nazis.
>>
>> "Wild Ukrainian" is one description that comes to mind. The rest
>> of the story is improbable, URL by email if you wish. Our jewish
>> brethren appear interested in painting them with the same brush as the
>> Nazis.
>>
>> I suggest that only one version of the story can be true. Given
>> the communist origin of one version of it, I can not hold that version
>> as correct without extraordinary evidence that it is correct.
>
> Again, I am aware that some Ukrainians were used by the germans
>as helpers in the slave camps. We have had a few of them sent out of
>the country after the survivors came forward. But the best information
>I have is what I posted above. If you havve references that contradict
>it, let us all know.
You are not clear as to what I should contradict.
I will not waste time speaking agianst NKVD posts.
I am in the Irving camp on this issue. But of course I have my
own camp also.
I have uncovered without the least inference of holocaustianism,
holohuggerism, where to lose at least a milliion people and these are
never mentioned in this "disaster" (Shoah) thing. But this is
speculation.
I also clearly state there were never more that three million
total jews under Nazi control at its greatest point of expansion. That
is a known fact that anyone graduating from they fourth grade can
establish by doing their sums.
Shoah/disaster is a good word. I am not going to argue with that
word. There is a lot more I will argue with as I know the subject and
the nizkooks were kind enoough to edudate me.
=====
William Wallace
On 4 Oct 1997 13:27:24 GMT, Jack Garbuz <JGA...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>> Try to turn off all modern meanings of words.
>> They were not racists in today's nasty sense.
>> I am not saying they were good guys in any manner whatsoever. I
>>am saying they were human beings and quite rational. >
>Oh yes you love them and are one of them, a little frustrated Fuehrer who
>missed his big chance.
He ordered no extermination. In fact there is no extermination
order. Nor are there any of the tons of paperwork that would be
necessary to support any extermination. But you know that.
[And the answer is, Keren will post something that does not
address this matter and change the followup to alt.revisionism. And
the question is?]
>> We now have over 70 senior officers in the Wehrmacht who were
>>jews. Whe have uncounted junior officers and enlisted. >
>Actually, its been said to me many times by your ilk
You know you have trouble when you have ilk.
>that Hitler was
>really a Jew and that the holocaust was just a JEwish plot concocted by
>an evil Jewish mind. So why bother counting "Jewish" Wehrmacht officers.
I have never said that. I have only pointed out that the stories
did not start until after the war started with Russia and that their
source was the NKVD. Those are facts. That the NKVD had a paid staff
of professional propagandists is also a fact.
>Just say that the whole NASDP was just a bunch of friggin Jews and get it
>over with. More Jewish troublemakers, those Nazis.
As you know, I only point out that Zionists were clearly
collaborated with them.
>> Let me give you one simple fact. If you had converted to judaism
>>at any time during Nazi rule there was no law that would have effected
>>you. Not one.
>Yes Judaism was perfectly legal; only those who were racially Jewish had
>to be exterminated.
As you know, there is no evidence of any extermination. That is
NKVD material from the same folks who brought you Katyn Woods.
>If Hitler put on a yarmulke and went to shul, no
>problem. Oh, he was Jewish; ooops! So that's why he didn't go to shul.
You are obviously so enrapt in your own fantasies you have never
grasped a word that has been said.
Sven Noltemeier
William...@freedom.org (William Wallace) wrote:
> We now have over 70 senior officers in the Wehrmacht who were
>jews. Whe have uncounted junior officers and enlisted.
Utter nonsense. There were 70 of several thousand officers who had
_one_ grandparent that was considered Jewish. Those officers didn't
see themselves as Jewish, and only because they were needed in war
they didn't have to do the slave-like work assigned to those
"quarterly Jewish", this nonsense Nazi construct.
> If you look at the actual laws that were passed, there were so
>many exceptions as to raise a national scandal if it were to happen
>these days. If there had been an opposition party they would have been
>excoriated for the exceptions.
> Let me give you one simple fact. If you had converted to judaism
>at any time during Nazi rule there was no law that would have effected
>you. Not one.
Complete and utter nonsense. Cite the law which exempts recent
converts from any discrimination. Conversion to Judaism was seen as
abandonment of "Deutschtum" (being German) and as treason. But you
knew this.
Sven