http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7861076.stm http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/01/2009130101043786259.html
Yeah, forget a lawsuit. Just go find some random Israeli and kill them, I am sure that would help get me justice. Maybe rockets or bombings might help.
Killing is wrong Israel do not wish to return land they occupied ilegally. The root cause of this is land. Only Israel can stop all this and bring peace.
when you push a nation to the walls, when you are uproot someone from his house what do you expect him to do? sing what a wonderful world
if you are so concerned about the land being 'tiny' why don't you give them your land, give a part of USA, may be new york ? when someone bulldozes your house in Harlem to make space for their construction , then you will know how it feels
Jordan is Palestine More than 2/3 of the Jordanian people are Arab 'Palestinians'. Jordan, West Bank and Gaza are approx 85% of the original Palestine Mandate (76% of the original Palestine Mandate land, was renamed Jordan and was given to the Emir Abdullah by the British)
The big difference is how data is collected, and how more people can access it. Nations have conquered each other for hundreds of years. Everyone from the Normans, the Romans, to the Spanish to the Pilgrim Fathers. This does not make it right. Times have moved on and it seems those who control the media get to determine exactly who is the terrorist and who is the soldier. I think the definition is clear. If you are fighting on soil that you were born on then logically you are the freedom fighter, and the occupier ( to denote a difference, as sometimes I agree it is essential for an armed group to interverne ina third party country) is the terrorist. It seems however that we have hardened our feeling to this and brainwashed ourselves into the justification of chronic involvement. This will cause a political backlash as more middle of the road westerners question themselves and their goverments, just as I have. But the goverments response will to be increasingly to annexe blame by subcontracting this to third parties such as Blackwater.
there are like 51 US states, how about that US since they are so much supportive to Israel, give them the smallest state they have, Vermont? ok let's tell the people of Vermont you have to leave whatever you own in Vermont, whether it's tangible like homes or intangible like memories, because the poor "chosen" are coming! and if you dare to say no, you will be considered terrorist, greedy, peace-hating, and if you kept saying no and tried to resist you will be killed. next time when you talk to "God".. oops sorry, I mean next time when "God" talks to you, tell him as chosen you deserve a better place, not that place surrounded with all these "terrorists"
Please forgive my ignorance as I really don't know the true facts here but didn't the Jews own the place first? Was it not taken from them by Palestinians around 600AD and given back to them after the 2nd world war because they had no place to call home and had suffered Hitler's attrocities? @Imad - Wouldn't giving Vermont back to the Indians be sort of fair too?
I will try to answer your question in short, by example: who owns Saudi Arabia now? the answer that will jump immediately to the mind of the reader is: Muslims but a pagan may argue and say, no it's the Pagans who own the land, because before Islam, Pagans were living there, does this give the right for non-Arabian Pagans to come and live in Saudi Arabia, and expel Muslims from there? does it give the right for Arabian Pagans to do the same and expel Arabian Muslims? what was the name of Saudi Arabia before it is become Saudi Arabia? what was the name of Mecca, and Madina, can Pagans, if they have the power, come and change the name of Mecca to Becca, and Madina to Yathreb? and say it's even written in Qur'an, Becca, not Mecca.. this is the argument that Zionists follow, the right to live in the land is for the people who lived there since thousands of years, those are Arabs, even before the ancient Israel was, which by the way, did not last except for around 70 years, and they were invaders, as for Indians, they have all the right to live on their own land, there been a lot of injustice, massacres, killing that been committed against them, they suffered a lot, but their suffering came to an end, and they are living on their own land, minority maybe on their own homeland, but as far as I know they have equal rights now, you do not see Americans of European origins, putting Indians in open-air prisons, trying to drive them out of America, Indians have the right to participate in the political process, and if they are a majority, it is possible that the president would be Indian, black people too had suffered a lot till not so long, but now, they have equal rights, maybe there are still some racism, but the state policy is against such sick ideas, speaking from the race point, I do not see the Governor of Vermont saying Vermont is the national home for white, because every state is their home, as well as the home for black and Indians and all Americans, I also do not see a black saying Alabama is the national home for Black people, and expelling white and put them in camps in the neighboring states, and deny their rights to live on their home land, how it would be if that Governor came to Alabama in 1948, and the white been there since thousands of years? from a religious point of view, can the Christians of Vatican claim Syria as theirs, since Christianity been the religion there before Islam? Syria is the home land for Syrians, be Muslims, Christians, or else, nobody have the right to expel the others, so how it would be with Palestine? Ghandi in 1938 said: the call of a national home for Jews is not a Jewish project, it is a Zionist project, and on purpose there is a lot mix between both, mainly done by Zionists, and ignorant about the fact that it is Zionism (which is a political movement, not a religion) who called for a national home for Jews in Palestine, and in fact, they called for a national home for Jews, no matter where, and they had other choices else than Palestine, Argentina was an option too, as this proven document from UN says: source - UN now stop for a moment, and think, why Argentina? it's because they wanted a national home, no matter where, Palestine, was most fit for their agenda because they can use history, and religion, to justify their project of stealing that country from it's people, but what if they took Argentina, which was an option too? will they tell Argentinian people it's the promised land? possible... they may interpret things in different ways as they did in Palestine case.. will they say we been there like 3000 years ago, and now we came back? possible too, I do not know the ancient history of Argentina.. they wanted a national home, and sadly, this was not possible without expelling, massacring, killing and oppressing the native people of that country, if it happened in American more than 500 years ago, why we should allow it to happen in the 20th century? true Jews are against this political project that came to steal Palestine, Google Jews against Zionism and you will know some interesting facts, one of these proven and documented facts, is the fact that Zionists did not help to save the Jews in the holocaust despite they were very able to do so, not only they did not help, they stood against the ones who wanted to help, and they collaborated with Nazi's. it's natural that people of Palestine, Muslims or Christians, would resist such a try to wipe their country off the map, and off the history, in one of the biggest crimes and frauds in history. again, do not take my words, verify for yourself, I m just telling you that there is another story, and it would need you to do your own research and study to reach all the facts. P.S. sorry I wanted it a short post, it ended lengthy.
Thanks for your answer and point of view, here's another. Say, for examples sake, I live an Jewery Street. My father's name was Jewery and the street was named after him. Then over many years people built houses and a more famous person moved in, maybe Elvis. One fine day the local council decided to change the street name to Presley Avenue. I can decide whether that is a little problem or a big problem and can fight tooth and nail to retain the original name. I decide stuff it, I want it called Jewery Street because my father made it and I'll devote my life to make sure that it happens. I go to court and lose so the next day I go out and get a bazooka and prepare to blow up the council. The council somehow becomes aware of this and sends out the cops. We get into a battle and I lose. In reality, I chose to fight. The street is still there, my house was still there but because I didn't like the change I chose to fight and made it much bigger than it should have been. My friends and neighbours who like me but hate authority back me up & it turned into all out war with many casualties and wrongdoings from both sides. Now they've killed my best friend so I'll never give up the fight... Wouldn't it be best to just have allowed the name change in the first place? I know it's probably not as simple as I'm saying and I do not intend to insult or offend anyone, I just think the fanatics are the ones causing the problem, as in all walks of life.
it is not as simple as this which is right, and also it is not like that, the ones who came later, did not try to kick you out of the street and of your house to steal it, or settle in your garden or in a room and tell you if you do not like it then leave, God promised us this house, and your friends and neighbors, if they allowed this to happen to you, it means they are next, besides they did not first start a fight, then been attacked too, as you been attacked, so what else is left to them except defend? specially with the calls for "Great Israel" that includes whole of Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and huge parts of Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Saudi Arabia.. I understand that you have the one side of the story, check who started 1948 war by attacking and occupying more lands than allotted to them by UN partition plan, and check who provoked and started 1967 war: the law also did not rule in against of you, it ruled with you, and said that their acts is illegal, which in Palestinian case, the occupation of Gaza Strip, and West Bank is illegal, I do not want to get in details, about how the UN issued it's resolution to establish Israel, and what bribes and threats that been done to this, you can check it it's all there documented, also, you will see none of the countries who are mostly involved accepted it, no country in Africa or Asia did, except South Africa under the apartheid rule.. despite that, the resolution came, but what about the resolution to end occupation which is mainly what concerns Palestinians right now? so I would encourage you and myself, to learn more about the conflict, it's been going on since 60 years, and it's hard to cover it in details with one post, it would be expected from anybody if they want to form a good opinion, to base it on a good knowledge about the conflict, because this will prevent propagandists from either side to use people brains as dumpsters, and will prevent injustice from happening to either sides, in this, justice only scares the unjust or in more clear word the racist and truth only scares the dishonest and you do not seem any of these, while Israel have them both and even more. thanks & sorry again for the lengthy post.
Okay, as I am a somewhat of a dimwit character that still hasn't chosen sides, let's clear it up in my mind, one step at a time for the world. Did the Jews own the land first? By that I mean all of the land currently occupied by Palestinians. PS: That should help with a short post from you but you can expect more questions from me.