Rick Reuben wrote:You go right on believing that a crew of 7th century converts descended from Magyars and Huns, with more blood of Attila in them than blood of Abraham, have a Biblical claim on that land. The UN legalized their bullshit, but the Zionists are Khazars and they are not related to the Jews who were cast out of the Holy Land.

This is the kind of race-based nonsense that you are interested in, not me.

I've never said I believe this, and I in fact don't believe this. I have no biblically based beliefs in this matter at all.

I also have no race-based, i.e. racist, beliefs in this matter either. You obviously do.

Hamas slams Annapolis peace talks
Mon 26 Nov 2007, 14:48 GMT

By Nidal al-Mughrabi

GAZA (Reuters)

Vowing to go on fighting the "Zionist enemy", Hamas called Mahmoud Abbas the worst leader in Palestinian history on Monday and said he had no right to make concessions to Israel at the Annapolis peace conference.

Speaking at an "anti-Annapolis" conference in Gaza, leaders of the Islamist group which seized the enclave from Abbas's forces in June said the president did not represent the Palestinian people and vowed never to recognise Israel.

"Let the whole world hear us -- we will not cede an inch of Palestine and we will never recognise Israel," Hamas's Gaza leader Ismail Haniyeh told the meeting of about 1,000 people, including representatives from some other Palestinian factions.

...

Hamas leaders have offered a long-term truce with Israel in return for a Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip. But the Islamist group continues to say it will not formally recognise Israel and its 1988 founding charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state."

"We believe what has been taken by force can only be returned by force," senior Hamas figure Osama al-Muzaini said.

Bob, if you want to have an argument about that stuff find someone who believes in it.

My interest in the middle east is humanitarian and not based on any particular racial theory. In fact I have an active disbelief in the entire notion of racial theory, let alone any specific racial theory.

It's entirely possible to believe in Israel's right to exist without racial or religious justifications. In fact, so far, it looks to me like racial and religious posturing has been an impediment to peace for all involved.

So, again, if you want to explore this stupid racist stuff, find someone who cares, not me.

I'm also a coward when it comes to serious discussions about astrology, magic crystal therapy, pyramid power, and the tooth fairy.

A mess of paragraphs between Bob and Galanter.

You can't claim to have an interest in international law and then pick and choose which UN resolutions are legitimate. They are all legitimate from the point of view of formal law.

So you either have to respect Israel's right to exist, as created by the UN, or stop throwing UN resolutions that find against Israel in everyones face. Or take the 3rd option...obvious hypocrisy

----------------------------------------
Rick Reuben wrote:
You go right on believing that a crew of 7th century converts descended from Magyars and Huns, with more blood of Attila in them than blood of Abraham, have a Biblical claim on that land. The UN legalized their bullshit, but the Zionists are Khazars and they are not related to the Jews who were cast out of the Holy Land.
----------------------------------------

This is the kind of race-based nonsense that you are interested in, not me.

I've never said I believe this, and I in fact don't believe this. I have no biblically based beliefs in this matter at all.

I also have no race-based, i.e. racist, beliefs in this matter either. You obviously do.
-----------------------------------------

galanter wrote:

I have no biblically based beliefs in this matter at all.

Then on what do you explain the UN gift of Palestine to Khazar Zionists who were not Sephardic? You say you endorse the UN decision to give them that land- what do you think the UN used to legitimize that decision, but a supposed Biblical claim?

galanter wrote:
I also have no race-based, i.e. racist, beliefs in this matter either.

Of course you don't. There are no pro-semites- only anti-semites.

Answer the questions:

Did the Zionists use the Bible to support their claim to Palestine?

Did these claims factor into the Balfour Declaration and the UN decision?

Should religious texts be used to certify a claim to land?

Were the Zionists the same Jews who were driven out of Palestine by the Roman destruction of Judea?

Those are real questions for anyone who wants to argue that the Zionists have honest claim to Israel. If you can't answer them, then what you are saying is: the world community can displace defenseless populations for whatever reason they choose- justice is sold to those who can pay the most for it.
--------------------------------------------

Bob, are you a psychopath? Honest question.

Do you really think the UN created Israel because each member state who voted "yes" did a biblical analysis and determined that it was God's will? Of course not. Those were not the "real questions" then, and they are no more "real" now.

If Bob wants to tell us what he thinks God wants or doesn't want he is of course free to. He's also free to keep spouting whatever racial theory he harbors about true Jews and fake Jews and blah blah blah.

I'm a lot more interested in supporting a peace process that has a chance of working. Iran, Hamas, and as of earlier today, Hezbollah want to see the current process fail, and they've threatened violence to that end. Other Muslim states, even Syria to some limited extent(!!), are active participants at the negotiation table.

So let's get real here. The "real question" is this: What is worthy of support, the peace process or those committed to destroy that process through violence?

galanter wrote:I'm a lot more interested in supporting a peace process that has a chance of working.

What do you think that such a process might need? In other words what would both sides need to do to give any peace process a chance to work?

If you think one such needed action would be the halting of settlement building in the West Bank (at least - if not the dismantling of those already there) then you have to ask why that won't happen (and it won't BTW).

If you agree that the halting of settlement building (at least) is needed for any process to work and you accept that that's unlikely to happen (on account of the fact that it never has before - despite promises made) then you have to ask why they continue to build and refuse to dismantle.
If you think there is no religious justification for such building then you are being deliberately obtuse.
You might not follow any religion but surely you accept it is relevant to the major players?

I suspect however you might not think settlement halting is necessary for a process to work. How you think any peace process can work when it doesn't involve the elected leaders of one major major player (however abhorrent they may be) is beyond me.

It can't.

I suspect your peace process involves the fellas with the biggest guns doing whatever the fuck they want to do. Cause they can.

But do enlighten us.

Rick Reuben,

You are an idiot. Biased and ignorant, you know nothing about foreign policy in the Middle East. You would like to illustrate to everyone else in very simplistic terms that the U.S. and Israel are "bad" while Hamas, Syria, Iran and Hussein led Iraq are "noble", with the best intentions. Take your blinders off.

Have you read Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America? It was a book researched and PUBLISHED in 1999, four years before the invasion of Iraq and two years before 9/11. In it are details of meetings that Bin Laden had with Hussein and his sons in 1998.

Also, my father, a thirty year veteran of the Army and a retired colonel was in the Middle East in the 1990's and was part of intelligence teams that were tracking Bin Laden's movements even back then. Classified documents of information that would throw all of your "info" into a talespin.

Have you served in the military? Have you been to the Middle East? Have seen Iraq?

No.

You live in an insular world of blogs, chatrooms and whatever information is fed to you by the media.

sphincter wrote:
Did the Zionists use the Bible to support their claim to Palestine?

Did these claims factor into the Balfour Declaration and the UN decision?

Should religious texts be used to certify a claim to land?

Were the Zionists the same Jews who were driven out of Palestine by the Roman destruction of Judea?

Those are real questions for anyone who wants to argue that the Zionists have honest claim to Israel. If you can't answer them, then what you are saying is: the world community can displace defenseless populations for whatever reason they choose- justice is sold to those who can pay the most for it.

Those might be real questions, but what is the point? The subject of whether or not some nation has a "right" to exist is a total red herring. The fact is there are millions of Israelis living in the nation of Israel. And a great many of them need to just shut up and begin acting decent.

The original, pre-twentieth century inhabitants of palestine were mostly muslim but not exclusively; there were christians and jews. As great numbers of Zionists began settling the region it was not just the muslims they displaced. There are many documented instances of spokesmen for the original Jewish palestinian communities protesting to Zionist leadership and the British about the disruptions massive Zionist colonization was bringing.

The real problem is the notion of a "Jewish" nation. It might sound harmless enough - everyone likes Woody Allen movies, right? But governing is about power, and who can use it. In a Jewish nation, jews are sovereign. What non-jew would want to live there? By the very definition of the nation, any non-jew is a second-class citizen. Is that what the UN had in mind? Can you name any other nations like that? Are they nations you respect, Galanter?

But the jews have been persecuted, they need a home, someplace safe? The jews who came to America and Canada are a hell of a lot safer than the jews who went to Palestine. So what is the point?

The point is take your damn, illegal nuclear weapons, blow yourselves to kingdom come, and maybe the rest of the world can focus on something more useful for a change..

I think is ridiculous and pedantic that Americans (or Canadians, for that matter) are arguing over whether or not Jews have legitimate claims to lands in the current and former Palestine over two-THOUSAND year old claims of ownership, when we are standing on land that we stole from the native tribes who occupied these lands two-HUNDRED years ago.

As Americans, we are being fed half-truths and lobbyist bullshit and prodded to want to make some shit right on the other side of the globe??

But what about the skeletons in OUR closets??

Some brutally blighted reservations and a handful of casinos don't come close.