BS: Caliphate

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 07:25 AM

"You are quick enough yourself to fling words like "fascist" and "Nazi"
So are Jews and non-Jews alike - you have never responded to any of those Mike - how about doing so now?
If he is suggesting that battle should commence - who is he referring to if not the Arab people as a whole
That the Palestinians should have expressed an opposition to Israel from the start cuts both ways, from the time Israeli "freedom fighters" went through the villages hurling grenades into occupied houses in order to create a "Jewish State" - that, for me has too much of the "Aryan people" ring to it as far as I am concerned.
If one side is wrong, both are.
At the present time we are talking about whether the Israelis should be allowed to bomb the Palestinian people as a whole into submission in order to return to the good old days of ghettoisation, blockade, Berlin walls and gradual but inevitable total displacement
Sure, Hamas isn't doing any favours to to Palestinians, in fact all it seems to be achieving is to give Israel a chance for stepping up its militarism, but it really doesn't need that anyway.
Don't let my feelings carry me away - sorry - none of us have any answers here, and certainly, we have no say over what is happening - al we are left with are our right to express what we feel.
The last place I would look for advice is a wannaba goose-stepper who probably couldn't pass the intelligence entry test if he tried (does the army have one of those?)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 07:21 AM

Jim is "special".


The rules that have to apply to the rest of us do not apply to him.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 06:15 AM

Be fair, Jim. I know you feel very strongly on this isuue, but please do not let your feelings carry you away.

I can't see how you can asset that T's statement that

"the cancer of Islamofascism has spread. Using this idiotic conflict as an excuse militant Islam declared war on the West over 40 years ago"

equates to "You've just described them all as "Islamofascists"'. What "all"? He was saying was that those Islamists, whom he has specifically described as the "militant" part of Islam [which they clearly are, or else they wouldn't be doing whatever it is they are doing] who commit such enormities as 9/11, 7/7/ &c, have fascist temdencies which they have been displaying in various attacks for 40 years. Again, who are the 'all' whom you accuse him of applying the name to. It's clear that it only the destructive militants that he labels thus.

You are quick enough yourself to fling words like "fascist" and "Nazi" and such about in application to those of whose views and activities you disapprove. It has, as you know, been a big bone of contention between us for some time. Why should you deny him the right to apply a similar name where he deems it appropriate?

Sauce for the goose and all that...

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 05:45 AM

"'course you're not"
You've just described them all as "Islamofascists"- who the **** are you suggesting should "fight on and be done with it" - the Palestinians whose homes are presently under attack from Israeli bombardment and inevitable annihilation - if not, who? (it's just been announced that it's re-started)
There's an insightful cartoon in this morning's paper showing a heavily armed and armoured Israeli soldier with a shield bearing the word "warmonger" about to kill a fish in a barrel - the fish is spitting back - sums it up really.
There is no doubt that, should it come to it, the Palestinian people are in no position to offer any resistance and will either be slaughtered or driven to join the five million or so refugees scattered all over the world
This has never been about 'defence, as far as Israel is concerned - go and look at the casualty figures down the years and see how they balance out - and see how many of them are non-combatants - particularly children.
For all the bluster about defence, so far, the casualties of these rocket attacks has been precisely none - that's what this overkill is defending the people of Israel from.
It's the serial school bully complaining that one of his victims "kicked me sir".
When it comes down to it, it's about two groups of people, each with equal rights to a territory, being led by messianic zealots.
Richard is right - when it comes to worms-eye level, people are people and are happy and willing to get along with each other, whatever their differences in culture and religion.
Encouraging them to slug it out would suit the Israeli regime down to the ground - survival of the richest, strongest and most aggressive.
All the bullshitting bar-room-bluster from a wannabe warrior doesn't alter that one iota.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 04:28 AM

"Kill them all and be done with it."

You advocating that solution Christmas? Because having read through what I have written I most certainly am NOT.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 04:05 AM

It seems to me that the assertions from Teribus above rather support the view that the local inhabitants (apart from the Zionists) consistently opposed the Zionist land-grab.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 03:44 AM

Islamofascism - sums up your brain-dead partisanship.
Kill them all and be done with it.
Yeah - we know all about that Terrytoon - save it for closing time - you are a friggin' caricature.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 03:33 AM

Christmas is really great at clipping isn't he, shortening:

"Let them {The Palestinians and the Israelis} get on with it, they have had 67 years to sort it out and failed each and every time, fight on and be done with it."

To: "fight on and be done with it." Coupled with the usual Christmas style "over-the-top-but-inaccurate-knee-jerk reaction":

Yeah - lets kill them all because politicians can'r get it right.

"lets" Christmas??? WTF

lets as in "let's" = Let us??? We ain't even in the fight so just who the F**K are we going to kill and why? The world and it's dog have been bustin' a gut since 1947 to get this settled and in the meantime the cancer of Islamofascism has spread. Using this idiotic conflict as an excuse militant Islam declared war on the West over 40 years ago.

Bloody right let THEM fight it out once and for all and get done with it, get it over and finished with.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 03:15 AM

"fight on and be done with it."
Yeah - lets kill them all because politicians can'r get it right.
By that logic, we'd all be a long time dead.
These are civilians - men women and children being slaughtered - and this has been the case from the beginning; slaughtered refugees, homes razed to the ground, ordinary men, women and children going about their daily lives being bombarded and showered on by flesh-eating chemicals, daily humiliation by uniformed thugs... fuck them all because politicians cannot arrive at a situation where two groups of people cannot live together in peace.
Yeah - let the Israelis bomb them into the Stone-Age - they have the capability, and they seem to have the will.
This sort of chocolate-soldier 'humanity really does suck!
Jim Carroll

From Yesterday's Irish Times;
"I WOULD RATHER DIE AT HOME": residents prepare for threatened onslaught.
CASUALTY FIGURES RISE AS ISRAEL CLAIMS PRACTICES 'CAREFUL' AND 'HUMANE'
IN AN AREA THAT IS HOME TO BETWEEN 70,00 AND 100,00 PEOPLE, THE ISRAELI WARNING HAS CAUSED WIDESPREAD FEAR.

In a side street in Gaza's Shati camp, an Israeli warning missile has just "knocked on the roof of Alaa Hadeedi's house, filling the road with a thin mist of smoke. A few ambulances have rushed to the scene and are waiting 100m or so from the house. Behind them, a crowd of wary neighbours gather to watch.
There is a sudden shout as someone hears the sound of the second missile - a live bomb this time - and the crowd surges backwards. Alaa Hadeedi's house explodes in a billowing cloud of concrete and wood fragments.
A driver by trade, Alaa Ha-deedi - who was not at home when the missile hit - stored gasoline inside his house. It ignites in an orange fireball.
This is the reality of Israel's campaign of house destructions: a missile fired into a street in which perhaps 150 people are gathered barely 100m from the target; people anxious to help and equally anxious about their shops and houses.
According to al-Mezan, a Gaza-based Palestinian human rights group, in the past week 869 Palestinian homes have been destroyed or damaged in similar Israeli attacks that have also claimed the lives of 173 people, many of them civilians. Even as talk of a ceasefire is growing, the attacks by both sides continue.

COLLATERAL DAMAGE
The way the Israeli military tells it, "knocking on the roof is a careful and humane practice, its drone operators and pilots holding back against the risk of collateral damage. But too often it is not careful, as the civilian death toll from the last week of attacks on Gaza attests.
A mile or so from Alaa Hadeedi's house, in the same Shati neighbourhood, Dr Nasser Ta¬tar, director general of Gaza's largest medical facility, the Shi-fa hospital, is examining the ruins of his house and of his private clinic.
He says he had just returned to his family on Sunday night after working a week straight at an overwhelmed hospital short of resources. "We've had tens of deaths and hundreds of injured. I needed to be at the hospital," he says. "It was just after the time for breaking the Rama¬dan fast at 7.50pm.
"The IDF called my nephew with a 10-minute warning saying that they planned to destroy my house. Because it took him several minutes to find me, it was less than 10 minutes. I got my family out quickly and warned my neighbours to take care. Then they hit my house with a rocket and then a second."
He walks through the destruction, picking up a book left on his consulting desk now covered in dust, and examines the tangled crater at the centre of his gutted home.
"I'm at a loss to explain why they did this," says 59-year-old Tatar. "I have been a doctor for 30 years. First I was a cardiologist, then head of cardiology, then director general. I have tried to reach out through channels to find out why this happened, but I've had no reply."
It is not only individuals who are feeling the impact of Israel's campaign but now whole communities, after Israel on Sunday advised the residents of large areas of the north of Gaza - which it says is the site of rocket launches - to leave before a threatened large-scale attack. In an area that is home to be¬tween 70,000 and 100,000 people, the warning has caused widespread fear and panic.
Farmers
On the edge of Attatra, a mile or so from the Israeli border and one of the threatened areas, Hiba Abu Halima, 34, is walking with her sister. "We left yesterday before the 12 noon dead¬line," she says. "We moved to a UN school in Gaza City. But we are farmers. I wanted to come back with our brother to water the crops. So we returned at nine this morning. We are afraid because no one is here, ft was already too dangerous with the shelling and we were fright¬ened by what the Israelis said they planned to do."
There is a sharp detonation close by from a tank shell. Hiba's sister presses herself to the wall bolt upright, her face crumpling as she bursts into tears. A lift is offered back to Gaza City but the sister refuses. "My brother is back there," she says, sobbing. "I don't know where he is. I have to wait to see that he is safe."
Others from Gaza's north who fled on Sunday are now living in crowded UN schools that have been opened as shelters.
At the Alfakhoura school in Jab-aliya yesterday families were still arriving, boys carrying in their bedding balanced on their heads.
Outside a classroom turned into a dormitory, 56-year-old In-shira Salman is sitting with her family of 15. "We slept on the ground outside last night," she says. "All the rooms were full and we had no bedding. So we didn't sleep last night.
"We came here in a panic. We live in a village only 700m or so from the border, which they have been shelling. Yesterday we heard on the television and on the radio that the Israelis had said they planned to attack and we should leave. We were so worried that we left. We'll only go back when it is over."

HUMILIATED
Not everyone, however, is prepared to stay the duration of the war in the UN refuges. Back in Attatra, 42-year-old Yasser Kh-deir, an air conditioning engineer, is sitting outside his business with his son Faris (16) and other local boys.
He tells the story of Gaza's re¬cent wars, Israel's Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009 and Operation Pillar of Defence in 2012. "My nephew was killed just up the road in 2012. During Cast Lead I spent 20 days living in a UN school. I won't do that again. It did not feel safe and I felt humiliated," he says.
"My wife and other children are in Gaza City but I wanted to come home. I am staying in my house because it is the only option. If I am killed, I would rather die at home."
(Guardian service)

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 02:37 AM

This thread and the similar one are a La la land equivalent of what goes on in the real world.

Israel has far too many blinkered apologists for them to engage in real peace negotiations and the Palestinians have been kicked to fuck and let down so often, the world shouldn't really scratch it's head when they match the Israelis in sabre rattling and voting for hard nosed militants to sort this.

Just like in the real world, point out how disgraceful Israeli forces are being and you are accused of being a fan of the holocaust.

The likes of Bobad and beardedbruce have an agenda. Michael and, when he gets back, Keith like supporting any agenda if people such as Jim or I don't like it.

Sigh.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 14 - 01:39 AM

Actual recorded fact in the matter of solutions proposed to establish the "Two-State" that Abbas says he is striving for comes down on the side of Bobad in this discussion.

Originally offered by the UN in 1947 the Jews of Palestine agreed to it and the Arabs of Palestine rejected it and encouraged by their Arab neighbours they elected to go to war with the express intention of "driving the Jews of Palestine off their land and into the sea". The importance of this is that as one side rejected the proposals there are no fixed boundaries, there are no "official borders" that any party in this conflict agree to - until there are then no meaningful negotiations can take place. Another important facet of this from the perspective of the Arabs of Palestine centres around divisions in their own ranks. Back in 1947 half of the Arabs of Palestine split along tribal lines followed the self-styled Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in wanting a separate Arab Palestine, while the other half wanted the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to annex Palestine (The latter actually gained something out of the war of 1948 in that the Jordanians invaded and occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank areas of Palestine - in 1967 the Israelis liberated those areas and drove the Jordanian occupiers out restoring the land to Palestine).

Those who have agreed peace deals with Israel since 1949 and who have honoured those agreements have never subsequently been attacked by Israel. Those who have not and who harbour terrorists who continue to attack Israel and her people are, quite rightly attacked.

The latest "ceasefire" was agreed to by Israel and renounced by Hamas - TRUE?

Let them get on with it, they have had 67 years to sort it out and failed each and every time, fight on and be done with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 09:37 PM

Sure thing Greg, you bet.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 09:00 PM

The "powers" are likely after you, Boo, because they're anti-Semites, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 06:42 PM

It's not a theory it's a fact but since you've got my number I'd better let it go - you have the power here.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 06:36 PM

Bobad, I'v got your number. I'm not about to run off to do research to prove your theory that I happen to think is misguided. Do your own research. Better yet, let this one go.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 06:22 PM

"Israel has a real knack for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory when it comes to peace talks."

I would posit that if you were to do a little research on the number of proposed agreements accepted by Israel and rejected by the other side since 1947 and posted the results, Greg wouldn't be so quick to honk his approval.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 01:29 PM

Ya got it in one, SRS. And apparently they don't ever learn - Israel's been doing it for decades.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 01:27 PM

I'm sure I'm already on it. Israel has a real knack for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory when it comes to peace talks.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Mrrzy
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 01:07 PM

OK, there is also confusion on jewish v. hebrew - the jews didn't exist, according to their own mythology, until the hebrews got out of bondage and decided to dedicate themselves to their god and become jews. Both hebrews and arabs are semites, a term for humans who evolved for the deserts in what is often referred to as the levant, wih big noses for the dryness etc, and they have hated each other since before the hebrews got into bondage in the first place. And nobody knows how they got there (into slavery and far away from their home), but the chances are that either the people who hated them sold them, or that they were captured in a war and taken by the people who ended up bonding them, but then why didn't they take the arabs too, and either way you have resentment between the hebrews and the arabs. Then you add in a god who has chosen the jews, and forget rational discourse between the 2... so back at the dawn of time when people are talking about the Mess o'Potamia they should not talk about jews, that is an anachronism.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:58 AM

Now c'mon, SRS - all that land was given to the Israelis BY GOD. Doesn't pay to trifle with God's Will.

Do be careful or you'll end up on the BeeBoo Anti-Semite Enemies of Eretz Yisrael List.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:47 AM

You're going to have a tough time showing that whole areas of "the Levant" had zero population (except for Jews) at all relevant times - particularly if you take account of a recent "right to return" (NOT one based on religious texts from bazillions of years ago)

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:34 AM

It is NOT unreasonable to require that the same standards that are applied to Israel should be applied to the others in that region, and that not doing so is an indication of bigotry.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:32 AM

And those who claim that Israel is not permitted to defend itself?

I see how Hamas behaves, yet am criticized for judging them by that behavior.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:26 AM

"Those with the relevant titles might very well be a proper electorate for the communities occupying the land so bought. But only those areas."


So those areas with NO resident population, such as MOST of the land of Mandate Palestine in 1921, have NO proper electorate, and can be transferred by the nation controlling it (Turkey, as the follow-on to the Ottoman Empire) to the league of Nations , which placed it under Mandate.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:18 AM

If it were that simple, BB, it would have been solved by now. What they "deserve," who is "entitled," and what is "fair" - all difficult questions in the layers of activity.

But those who support Israel all-out 100%, with blinders on, who can only see jewish victims struggling to find a place in the world after WWII are not seeing the abuses Israeli politicians have visited on their neighbors. Leon Uris wrote lots of novels and managed to create a romantic view of Israel that many people have since then had to get over, to see how she actually behaves herself today.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:15 AM

What about 1967? That was when Israel took back the land that the West Bank Jews had been driven off of, and had been settled by Arabs after 1948.

I know several Palestinian families- They had homes in Ramallah, a Christian town, and were driven out in 1948 by the Arab League. So when can I expect the Palestinian Authority to vacate their property?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:14 AM

"YES OR NO."

Good luck with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:14 AM

Don't be silly MtheGM. Anyone can buy a house, or a garden. That is a private transaction. It may, if done correctly, confer title to the land bought. It does not make the buyer a conduit for representation of the people of the region.

Those with the relevant titles might very well be a proper electorate for the communities occupying the land so bought. But only those areas.

Now compare those areas with those that Israel now claims to rule.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:10 AM

They were driven out by the Arab League BECAUSE they were Jews.

Do you agree THEY deserve their land back?

YES OR NO.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 11:05 AM

What the fuck have Jews got to do with it?

A government is using it's predominant religion as an excuse for land grab. Got nothing to do with religion, either side. Religion is an excuse, not a fact.

1967.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 10:43 AM

"When bulldozers forcefully remove people who were born on a piece of land whilst some bloke nods his head with an old book in his hand"

So obviously those JEWS that were driven out of the West Bank in 1948 ( as well as the ones driven out of the OTHER Arab nation ) should get their land back, and the Palestinian Arabs who settled there after 1948 should be removed.


Or do you not think that JEWS have the rights you are giving Arab Muslims ( Since a number of Arab Christians were also driven out at that time).

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 10:37 AM

When bulldozers forcefully remove people who were born on a piece of land whilst some bloke nods his head with an old book in his hand, you tend to feel Balfour, The Ottoman Empire and the bronze age aren't all that relevant to those who become displaced, contrary to The Human Rights Charter...

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 10:30 AM

Which particular 'peoples', Richard? There was a mixture of nomadic Bedouin, indigenous Arabs, and Jewish settlers who had occupied much of the land by actual purchase, ie by paying in actual hard cash money for the parts of the land they colonised, this payment being made to the Turkish landowners under the Ottoman regime, who had freely agreed to sell their land. That is how the settlements in Galilee and around Lake Tiberias (under its various names) were established. The idea that the Jewish settlers just came in & settled on land without anyone's by-your-leave is one of the great myths. But of course, after the Turkish withdrawal, and the consequent mandate given to the British by the League of Nations, all sorts of new accommodations needed to be made. But why you should have any objection to those who had paid its then legitimate owners for land continuing in possession of it, I cannot see. It's you who just are not getting it.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 09:37 AM

To have legitimacy in such determinations the League of Nations needed the proper consent of and derived from the peoples of the lands in question. I almost cannot believe that you don't get it.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 06:41 AM

I don't think the dead women and children were around in the days of The Ottaman Empire, let alone when scriptures claimed lands a couple of thousands years ago...

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 04:23 AM

Richard: You really have not taken on board that I was replying to your fatuous assertion that "The League of Nations had no mandate from those whose lands in the Levant it claimed to give away", by pointing out that the entity "whose lands" we are here concerned with, the Ottoman Empire, whose lands these had been for centuries, had ceased to exist; and so one of the vital functions of the newly formed, by agreement of the victors of the recent conflict, LoN, became to determine what should become of its component parts. So whose lands, precisely, are you claiming the League had no warrant, or 'mandate', to give away? It had a warrant, or mandate, from all those upon whom victory had devolved the responsibility of establishing order amongst the chaos inevitably left by so destructive a conflict as had just occurred. And who should that be but the victorious allies?

A precise answer, please.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 04:09 AM

"greement of the victorious side's members" - precisely, MtheGM.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 04:05 AM

Regret that I must agree with this bit at least of Jim's post --

"The Israeli regime has betrayed the Jewish people and turned their dream into a nightmare"

As I never tire of saying, present-day Israel as it has evolved is one of the greatest disappointments of my entire life (even tho it must be admitted that it remains the only outpost of anything approaching a modern civil entity in the region). I do not think I am alone in this.

What, if anything, can be done about it, I wonder?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 02:40 AM

"YOU have show you are a bigot and anti-Semite according to the EU.
If I am an Antisemite, so is Chomsky, Haaretz, Jews for Peace, all the Israeli soldiers who have testified to the behaviour of the Army in Gaza, every Jew who is critical of Israeli policy in Gaza, every Jew who is now describing what is happening in Israel as 'ethnic cleansing'... and as was Einstein when he warned of the risk of fascism in the State of Israel due to the behaviour of the Israeli freedom fighters following Independence.
Last year I watched a film where six retired heads of the Israeli Secret Service all of whom were critical to the point of condemnation of Israeli behaviour in Gaza - the last one made it clear that he believed what was happening was comparable to Nazi Germany.
You are using those who died in Nazi gas ovens as a shield, much as you are claiming that Hamas is using the Palestinian people as a human shield, to justify behaviour that is recognised as an abuse of human rights and, in some cases war crimes.
You quote the E.U. definition because it suits you, yet you totally disregard their condemnation of Israeli behaviour as well as that of the U.N. and many of the nations of the world - and all of the war crimes and human rights organisations - by your logic, all of these are 'Antisemites' as well - I have never claimed anything that they haven't said or are still saying over and over again.
Not only is hiding behind the dead to excuse and support your extremism and inhumanity, a despicably and cowardly act, but in attributing Israeli war crimes and atrocities to 'The Jews' rather than the Israelis, you are a prime example of Antisemitism yourself -it is something I would expect from David Irving and the like.   
The first person I ever heard describe Israel as 'fascist' was the daughter of Holocaust survivors; her mother made a point of showing me her tattoo.
I grew up in a family who supported the dream of the State of Israel even before its establishment.
My father went to Spain because of what was happening to the Jews in Germany; he fought alongside Jews from Europe and America who were there for the same reason he was.
You claim I am an Anti-Semite, yet you have never once produced a single statement of mine attacking the Jewish people - on the contrary, by describing criticism of Israel as "Antisemitism" it is you who accuses the Jews of facilitating Sabra/Shatila, of using chemical weapons and heavy artillery on civilians: men, women, children, schools, hospitals - on establishing a doing on for a decade long blockade to starve the Palestinian people into submission - not the Israelis, but 'The Jews', according to you.
You say you have not - where in all your postings have you been anything but totally supportive of every single action of the Israeli regime?
You have yet to produce one single example of my attacking or even criticising the Jewish people, yet you describe me as an Antisemite and demand that I prove I am not - PROVE I AM - that is how natural justice works (go and read it up if you don't understand it, which you obviously don't).
The Israeli regime has betrayed the Jewish people and turned their dream into a nightmare, and you, with your strutting extremism, have supported that betrayal wholeheartedly.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 14 - 01:41 AM

Oh, come on Richard. We surely don't have to go again into all the biznis of the fact that the bit of land at issue here had been for centuries part of the Ottoman Empire, which had ceased to exist as a consequence of Turkey's having been an ally of the losing side in WW1, so the disposal of its parts had, by greement of the victorious side's members, come under the aegis of the League of Nations when it was formed; and as this bit had been captured in 1917 by General Allenby so was at the time under de facto British government...

All of which you know perfectly well. You really are too intelligent to imagine that retrospective Bridge-Law almost a century later is going, even emotionally, to trump the internationally recognised settlements internationally agreed in the years following 1918.
Might as well question the legality of the Nuremberg Trials at this time of day.

Meanwhile, an answer to my question, please. What is to be done about the fact that the State of Israel, little as the great and powerful Bridge may like the fact, is there, and unlikely to cease to be there? Are you at one with Hamas, Isis, Muslim Brotherhood et al, that it must be swept into the sea? Or what?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 11:29 PM

The League of Nations had no mandate from those whose lands in the Levant it claimed to give away.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 09:25 PM

You bet, Boo - play that anti-Semitism card again.

Predictable. Boring. And still silly.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 06:57 PM

"Very much like the United Nations of today, which Israel consistently ignores."

And for very good reason, see: UN, Israel & Anti-Semitism

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 06:12 PM

The League Of Nations, which was internationally regarded by treaty at end of WW1 as a recognised arbiter

Very much like the United Nations of today, which Israel consistently ignores.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 05:29 PM

I can see what you mean to some extent, Richard; but you seem to me to pay insufficient regard [in fact, none at all] to GB's mandate from The League Of Nations, which was internationally regarded by treaty at end of WW1 as a recognised arbiter in such matters; which mandate, as has been pointed out above, subsumed the 1917 Balfour Declaration.

And as to

"My current view (on balance) is that a Zionist claim to a historical right to so much land looks distinctly iffy"

what IYO is the conclusion to be drawn from this. Abolition of Israel? Starting from the somewhat dreary, but surely incontrovertible axiom that the only place one can start is where one happens to be, that scarcely appears a viable option, does it now? I mean, dash·it·all, dontchaknow, there the bloody country is, and it isn't just going to go away, or vanish just·like·that into the ewigkeit...

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 03:44 PM

There are several issues being tangled up in propaganda here and about the only person talking historical sense (Musket is talking some political sense) is John on the Sunset coast.

There is a time after which conquest and control confers legitimate domain - for example the Norman Conquest. That leads to two questions. First, how long is that time? Second who can reclaim after the removal of a conquering power?

The (Islamic) Ottoman Empire kicks off about 1300. It's gone (and this date is more critical) by a date that I'd put somewhere between 1919 and 1922.

I assert (and the Zionists here disagree) that none of the resulting treaties mandates etc derive power from a previous legitimate authority. They are accordingly in my view based on recent (ish) invasions and subjection. If (as many here will argue) several hundred years of English rule of Ireland did not confer historical authority, then the shorter periods since the mid-1920s do not cut the mustard.

So, the Ottomans being gone and the English etc not having legitimacy, who does have a legitimate claim to the areas that JohnotSC so usefully dubbed "the Levant".

Option 1 would be the then occupiers. That would leave most of the area vaguely Arab with a few Jewish hotspots - mostly Jerusalem (it seems - I am open to more historical detail here). If that is a sound foundation then a quick look at a map will show territorial expansion on a considerable scale by the Zionist (linguistic disconnect intended) state.

Option 2 would be the pre-Ottoman occupants. We seem to remain unclear who they were and where their descendants now are and whether they have a claim to statehood. It is however clear, whatever BB says, that the Jews (to use a perhaps not entirely apt collective description) were at the highest watermark, not very much there and had not been so for centuries and maybe more. To look at this further we'd need to look more closely at the issue of territorial abandonment (compare the Falkland Islands).

My current view (on balance) is that a Zionist claim to a historical right to so much land looks distinctly iffy.

I'm not yet persuaded that we need to look back 3,000 years or more to find a logical view on entitlement.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 02:34 PM

PeeDee, Clemens' "Innocent's Abroad" is humor. Its not a documentary. You going to be quoting Walt Disney movies next? Or Flip Wilson?

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: pdq
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 02:12 PM

In Mark Twain's book "Innocents Abroad" he travel through the Holy Land and observes that it is dry, inhospitable and nearly empty. That was 1867, many years after Adriaan Reland observed similar things, although Reland was more of an accurate historian than Twain, and entertaining curmudgeon.

The Arabs started the modern push to flood the Holy Land with their people after Balfour declared that a Jewish State would be carved out of Ottoman-occupied territory, around 1917.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 02:07 PM

"it's only recent history that counts"


You mean it is only the RIGHT recent history that counts.

Military occupation BY ARABS in 1948, driving out the previous Jewish Population is RIGHT, and approved of.

Military occupation BY ISRAEL in 1967, resettling Jews in the West Bank is WRONG, and disapproved.

Subject: RE: BS: Caliphate
From: bobad
Date: 14 Jul 14 - 01:47 PM

I find it interesting that in this thread when the history of the region was first invoked it was to legitimize the Arabs' claim to it but when the same history is invoked in support of the Jews' claim to it all of a sudden it's all; "that is ancient history anyway it's only recent history that counts".