Apartheid Israel

“Since pedXing has decided to slink off again I decided to start my own thread. In it I will present document after document as evidence of my premise. Along the way we can examine any number of topics that led up to the current conditions existing in Palestine. Some of the subjects that can be covered are:

1) Why did the British issue the Balfour Dclaration?

2) Why the British had no legal grounds to stand on when they issued the Balfour Declaration.

2) What the Balfour Declaration said.

3) What Zionists did to further the establishment of Israel after the Balfour Declaration up to the time of the creation of the modern state of Israel. ie. The undeclared British /Zionist Palestinian War of 1919 to 1948.

4) Atrocities committed in Palestine by both sides before and during the establishment of Israel.

5) "Defensive" War #1 as an excuse for land grabbing. ie The Six-Day War.

6) "Defensive" War #2 as an excuse for land grabbing. ie. The first invasion and occupation of Lebanon.

7) Israeli offers for a Palestinian state (the old "We offered them 90 percent of what they wanted and they refused" ruse) and why the PLO could not and would not accept them.

8) The 2006 invasion of Lebanon and why it was carried out.

9) Apartheid Wall as land grab.

10) The balkanization of the Palestinian West Bank and how Israel has turned Gaza into a modern day Auschwitz.

As an aside but no less important we could discuss two subjects of serious consequence to citizens of the United States. They are:

How Israel is using the United States to further its goal of an Ersatz Israel.

Israeli flase flag operations, spies, and neo-con treachery to the United States. ie. the Lavon Affair, the Israeli attack of the USS Liberty during the Six-Day War, Jonathon Pollard, Who was/is Mega?, AIPAC spies, the "Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" document, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Eliot Abrams, as architects of the Iraqi War.

Gosh so many topics about our good firends the Israelis. If you don't mind let this just be my thread. I really want this thread to be for people who want to learn, those whose minds are undecided about this whole Middle Eastern mess. If you Israelophiles want to defend Israel then start a thread about that. Just leave this thread to the uninformed and the learned Islamofascists, terrorists, Communists, Buchannan isolationists, anti-semites, NAZIs and HHers.”

“Although I do strongly suspect you're an 88, solitary hiker, go ahead and start down your list. I won't comment, per your request.”

“The US government should treat Israel like it treats working americans - don't give them anything.”

“Sol, you are getting annoying. Once again, you don't address what you say you will and then accuse me of slinking off. I've tried to argue with you with some respect and not play games. On the thread in question, you wrote:

I'll deal with your post tonight. Just don't slink off like you did when we got down to nitty-gritty on the 2nd Amendment several months ago.
last edited: 7/26/07 12:35:36 PM”
solitary hiker
12:32:17 PM
7/26/07

You never did respond and now you say I slinked off? That ain't how to establish your credibility. I like you Sol, you add something to the board and I hope to meet you someday. Don't worry I won't disturcb your thread anymore.

For anyone who wants to look at the evidence for themselves, just check out the following thread and scroll up to the post I've quoted then scroll down to the time of this post.

http://www.thebackpacker.com/trailtalk/thread/48704,3.php”

“After we finish trashing the Jews can we start on the French?”

“LOL! Sorry about that bud. Something came up that night and I left you hanging. Family comes first you know. But hey, I came in the next day at lunch with an offer to take the thread off on a more civilized track. I waited all afternoon with no response from you. I figured you had weaseled out like you did when we were gonna discuss what the Founding Fathers said about the meaning of the 2nd Amendment. Remember that? Probably not.

It doesn't matter. This is more important. And I'm ready to go. But this isn't just going to be a dry history lesson. I'm not just going to lecture. It doesn't work exactly like that. The students are going to have to dig a little and there are going to be pop quizs. And here's the first one.

XL you want to be taken seriously? Then go out and find me the complete text of the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and post it here. It's all of about 100 words. Can you do that?”

“glad your mind isn't made up, SH.”

“The student's have to provide the course material? Bearmagnet is shooting spitwads!!!”

“Have you ever seen this documentary Ped?

Protocols of the Elders of Zion”

“The students are going to have to dig a little and there are going to be pop quizs. - SH

Very Sarge-esque, 88. You're full of isht.”

“Let us do this in a manner that the unlearned can grasp. We don't want to overwhelm them. Surely you must recognize that most of them suffer from attention deficit disorder? The POTLEOZ document is much too long for their puny intellects. And who can vouch for the authorship of POTLEOZ? You, of all people, must know of the controversy surrounding that document? No we must go slowly. We must feed them baby food. Simple but hearty fare based on verifiable historical documents.

So XL are you going to google (hint: metacrawler is better) Balfour Declaration or not?”

“The US government should treat Israel like it treats working americans - don't give them anything.”
~uncliff

You must be union - lol!”

“It's fun to watch Mutt start to sweat. But at the same time it's sorta pathetic. He has nothing left in his bag of tricks but name calling. And that won't work with me.”

“I've always been self employed. I have no religion and am in the top 2% of americans financially. Also, have in-laws that have lived in Israel since 1968 and they certainly don't tell the commonly known story of Israels last 40 years.”

“Oh, I thought we were actually going to learn something. This is the same old name calling and half truths we always get.”

“Religion is like the NFL (here; No F--king Logic), everyone blames the teams, but never the league itself.”

“No logic in the NFL? That is blasphemy!”

“Beckham doesn't put a 'U' in football.”

“Beckham played ten minutes in his opening game and got stuffed.”

“Socal will be latino majority within 10 years and Beckhams $250 million speaks to that fact. Will LA re-enter the NFL? I know nothing about sports, but know they can be just as dangerous as religion when allowed by their DOLLAR $IGN existance.”

“Sol - in the second amendment discussion There was also a question I was trying to get you to answer, if you'll remember. You never did. I got bored.

Your offer about a new direction didn't address me, nor did it address any topic we were discussing. You offered a cease fire for the name calling, I don't see where I was involved in the name calling or complaining about it.”

“But what could I expect? The idiot still believes there were WMDs in Iqaq and the terrorists hate us because of our freedoms.
But I digress.

Since the rest of the grasshoppers don't want any extra credit I give you the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and a little more.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/balfour.htm

November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,
Arthur James Balfour

Notice that I have highlighted the date, the words Lord Rothschild and Palestine, the qualifier in the second paragraph, and the request in the last paragraph. We will need to study these subjects in order to fully understand the context and implications of the document.

But before we do that I want to introduce another document that will also help put the Balfour Declaration in context. That document is the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 and its corresponding annexation map. I’m not going to post the entire text of Sykes-Picot but it’s not very long and you can read it here.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/sykes.htm

Here’s a description of Sykes-Picot in Wikipedia. Note the agreement was hashed out in November of 1915. It has a map. Something particularly interesting is the fourth paragraph. I wonder how long that paragraph will remain? Wikipedia administrators being the PC types they are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes-Picot_Agreement

A bigger map can be seen here.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/sykesmap1.html
last edited: 7/29/07 6:22:26 PM”

““Let us do this in a manner that the unlearned can grasp. We don't want to overwhelm them. Surely you must recognize that most of them suffer from attention deficit disorder? The POTLEOZ document is much too long for their puny intellects. And who can vouch for the authorship of POTLEOZ? You, of all people, must know of the controversy surrounding that document? No we must go slowly. We must feed them baby food. Simple but hearty fare based on verifiable historical documents.

So XL are you going to google (hint: metacrawler is better) Balfour Declaration or not?”


Having known Ped, whom I addressed my post to, for the years that I have I can say with certainty he is one of the smartest people I have ever conversed with. I can also say I'd not make a post or be associated with a post such as yours that attempted to elevate my own intellect over someone else at the cost of humiliation and/or insult.”

“ I can also say I'd not make a post or be associated with a post such as yours that attempted to elevate my own intellect over someone else at the cost of humiliation and/or insult. - Nigal

You've come a long way since 2 measly months ago when you said I have the "mentality of a 2 year old" when I hadn't posted in 6 months. Perhaps you should forgive him?
last edited: 7/29/07 7:08:16 PM”

“Nigal - I hadn't seen that documentary (and only watched a little of it from your link). Its scary to see people taking the Protocols seriously in this country.”

“I know. To imagine that probably the smallest minority group gets together once every 100 years and decide what will happen in the world for the next 100 years is just too much.”

“Three time in my last post, the one you quoted, I use the pronoun "We", The "we" includes you. It includes pedXing. It even includes Mutt. It includes anyone who can intelligently discuss this issue. It includes anyone who will take the time to read the verifiable historical documents. I've given you two. I have several points to make later when I have the time. I'd like to do it now but I really have to go and earn a living.

You too can add verifiable historical documents IF they are relevant to the immediate topic at hand. POTLEOZ is a topic in itself and worthy of study, but it is not relevant to my discussion and its authorship is definitely not verifiable.

PS:
Now if you just want to post "whine" messages that's fine too as long as you do them when this thread is drifting down in the pack. I want this thread on top of Feugo for a long time.”

“So here we are. I’m assuming everyone has read the two assigned documents, looked at the map, and duly noted the dates, names, and information your sensei has graciously highlighted for you?

No? You haven’t done any of those things? …. I’m saddened but not surprised. Somewhere I read that in the Talmud there is a saying that goes like this.

"Truth is a heavy burden; therefore its bearers are so few."

Not bad but most people are familiar with a more current version.

"You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!"
Jack Nicholson as Col. Nathan R. Jessep - A Few Good Men

All people, at some time or another, don’t want to know the truth. Truth can be uncomfortable. Truth forces people out of their warm fuzzy paradigms. This is not a fault, just human nature. Oftentimes when confronted by real truth people lash out at the truth bearer. They try to subvert any real dialog about the truth by name calling or taking the discourse off on tangents. We see those tactics a lot here on Trail Talk. If you want to come to some understanding of the particular mess the United States finds itself in, don’t be diverted. Let us look at the underlying historical record and jointly come to some agreement on each point. The truth will be in the cumulative details.

Premise 1
The Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 states that after the conclusion of WWI British and French interests would control those parts of the Middle East as shown on the accompanying annexation map. Agree or disagree?

Premise 2
As stated in the Wikipedia article, the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 is a contradiction of predating promises made to Arabs concerning the formation of an Arab state that included land south of the 37 parallel (near the Turkish southern border), east to Persia (Iran) and the Persia Gulf, south to the Arabian Sea and east to the Mediterranean Sea. Agree or disagree? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hussein-McMahon_Correspondence

Premise 3
The land in both the Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Balfour Declaration was formally part of the Ottoman Empire up until the signing of the Armistice of Mudros in October of 1918. Agree or disagree?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armistice_of_Mudros
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partitioning_of_the_Ottoman_Empire
last edited: 7/30/07 7:04:18 PM”

“You too can add verifiable historical documents IF they are relevant to the immediate topic at hand. POTLEOZ is a topic in itself and worthy of study, but it is not relevant to my discussion and its authorship is definitely not verifiable.

It is an Israeli conspiracy thread so I simply said,

“Have you ever seen this documentary Ped?

Protocols of the Elders of Zion”

I wasn't presenting it as proof, evidence or anything. I simply asked Ped if he had seen it and gave him a link.”

“they try to subvert any real dialog about the truth by name calling or taking the discourse off on tangents. - SH

First, posting a bunch of propaganda is not "real dialog". Second, you're doing exactly what you're accusing your opposition of doing; if you have a reasoned viewpoint, give it in full.

Frankly, when people refuse to put forth a concise, plainly worded, referenced argument, and instead insist on sophomoric posturing by playing silly games like the Socratic Method, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that they are frauds.

Is there *anyone* who believes SH is an objective intellectual authority on this issue? Anyone? Bueller?

Frankly, I still think you're nothing more than an 88.”

“And I get crap for referencing World War II....SH...so far I have not heard the Hebrew religion or Isreal for that matter call for the destruction of our way of life, all religions except their own etc.

So here is the kicker....criminals in our society attack society we treat them like criminals. The Muslim mindset is one of destruction of all things NOT muslim...I am sticking with the people who will let me life my life. Go ahead and plan for your next BUND meeting (LOL) You and Vile must be in the same group.

I support Isreal and when you figure that in the Peace accord Clinton brokered the Isrealis offered to agree to EVERY PALESTINIAN demand....Arafat refused to sign...why? That would be the end of the victim parade.”

“still think you're nothing more than an 88.”

like the crazy 88's from kill bill?”

“88's typically hate jews more than any other group. The insanely biased, black-and-white, venemous manner in which SH demonizes the jews leaves me little doubt that SH actually could give a crap less about his supposed sympathies for the Pali situation.
last edited: 7/31/07 6:09:33 AM”

“That last post was so thick with condecention I wasn't even able to cut it with a knife. I had to step up the game...

”

“Once again, mutt, you have it wrong. Let me fix your rhetorism (remember me when this becomes a new word):

Is there *anyone* who believes SH is an intellect? Anyone? Bueller?


Too much posturing and condescension for it to be anything but. I agree completely with everything else. SH is nothing more than an angry little anti-Semite.

And now that I find myself in total agreement with Mutt and bacpac, I name the little hater, SH, best TT troll ever.”

“SH a troll? That would be awesome. I have to admit, I was kinda suspecting Sarge = SH, because Sarge also used to avoid admitting intellectual fraudulence by playing the socratic method game.
last edited: 7/31/07 6:44:39 AM”

“Mutt, don't try to bring me into your petty argument to gain common ground with your enemies and get people to feel sympathy for you.

btw, it's unethical to hate ethics as much as you do.”

“It's simply a matter of record, Sarge.

(Hmmm....a little too defensive...maybe, maybe.)”

“The "used to avoid admitting intellectual fraudulence" is your perspective, not a public record.

(Hmmm....a little too offensive...maybe, maybe.)”

“Mutt, if you'd like to challenge me and prove your point, I'd gladly take you up on your challenge on another thread so as not to hijack this one. I have no problem debating intellectual credibility with you on any number of topics I've been involved in on this website. I don't hide behind my morality. One person on here (which I unfortunately agreed to not converse with, but perhaps you can figure it out), as much as he detests me, I'm sure he'd agree from our personal (offline) conversations that I use personal knowledge and logic to arrive at my moral convictions. You're just too quick to assume people who have morals didn't use logic to arrive at them. That's a big flaw of yours, and you'd have more credibility if you'd recognize that. I think you're smart. (although, naive on some bigger issues, but that's ok and not meant to be a bust on you) You're just very closed minded and I think a lot of people on here would wish you'd open up so that they can really hear your thoughts.

That might sound ironic coming from me, but anybody who has been cool to me I've opened up with and spilled information about my personal life and convictions, and each of them would admit the perception of me being closed minded is a false one.
last edited: 7/31/07 7:13:05 AM”

“Heck I would be glad to debate intellectual credibility..in fact....

OH WOW>>>LOOK A RED balloon!

”

“LOL - and now a lengthy redirection!

Another mark in the sh = sarge column...”

“it's got shiny stuff”

“Why do you hate jews, Sarge?”

“Mutt, how could it be redirection if I wasn't in the conversation to begin with? (until you felt compelled to mention my name) That comment that you made WAS the direction. I'm just continuing in that vain. Don't confuse your conversation about SH with the one about me. That's another example of your perception not matching reality.”

“And when you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh*t...”

“cussing works well for that”

“


and

”

“Why would anyone hate these particular 7 million people and their second strongest military in the world? Start reeling Codwad.”

““Why would anyone hate these particular 7 million people and their second strongest military in the world? Start reeling Codwad.”

2nd? Try 26th.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/country_detail.asp?country_id=23”