They are right

Post #18,401 by bluke 11/15/01 10:10:50 AM Reply	They are right After all right the whole Southwest is conquered Hispanic territory. It will be very interesting to see the US get a taste of it's own medicine.
Post #18,404 by cwbrenn 11/15/01 10:55:06 AM Reply	lol. Bluke, you are so bitter I can't even get pissed by it anymore. It's just funny. "We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?" - Edward Young
Post #18,407 by bepatient 11/15/01 11:22:27 AM Reply	That would be funny... ...cause then we'd give the native Americans that own about 50% of the land in question a reason to hate the hispanics as much as they hate "the white man" nudge is as good as a wink to a blind man... You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #18,415 by marlowe 11/15/01 12:16:48 PM Reply	Let's give it back to the Apache. If we want to follow that kind of thinking to its logical conclusion, that is. [link\|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html\|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html] Sometimes "tolerance" is just a word for not dealing with things.
Post #18,416 by Steve Lowe 11/15/01 12:19:14 PM Reply	Utes, Navajo, and Hopi IIRC. ----- Steve
Post #18,499 by bluke 11/15/01 10:44:07 PM Reply	And why not? (msg)
Post #18,531 by jb4 11/16/01 9:03:42 AM Reply	Perhaps for the same reason... ...we shouldn't give Isreal back to Jordan? Or the settlements back to whoever owned them before they were "annexed"? Just asking... jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #18,636 by bluke 11/17/01 1:18:10 PM Reply	A little history Jordan is an artificial country created by the British from the Palestine mandate in 1923. It is the Palestinian state. Why Jordan should be entitled to anything else is beyond me. In fact, just about all 22 Arab states were created after WWI and are completely artificial. Tell me who owned the settlements before 1967? The answer is no one. Jordan claimed the land but no one except the British recognized their claim.
Post #18,661 by a6l6e6x 11/18/01 12:17:31 AM Reply	Is that like Israel? An artificial country created by the UN in 1948. There has not been anything like an Israeli state for nearly 2 millennia. Surely that's long enough to forfeit any right to exist. Unless you think Phoenicia needs to be reinstated too. See where your argument gets you? Alex Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. -- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
Post #18,666 by Ashton 11/18/01 5:23:11 AM Reply	Gobbledygook. Pangyria for the Pangyrians.
Post #18,668 by bluke 11/18/01 6:37:29 AM Reply	In a way, yes my point was that Jordan has no more standing then Israel with regards to these territories
Post #18,734 by bluke 11/19/01 3:47:47 AM Reply	Not really The Jewish people have maintained a connection to Israel throughout the ages, there is no comparable nation. For 2000 years Jews have prayed 3 times a day for a return to Jerusalem. Here is a fascinating quote from Mark Twain written over 100 years ago.[link\|http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1898twain-jews.html\|Mark Twain: Concerning The Jews, Harper's Magazine, March, 1898] "He has made a marvellous fight in this world, in all the ages; and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself, and be excused for it. The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed, and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight now, or have vanished. The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?" Here is an article for you to read about the so called "occupied territories" [link\|http://www.jcpa.org/art/brief1-1.htm\|Occupied Territories or Disputed Territories?]
Post #18,751 by CRConrad 11/19/01 10:14:10 AM Reply	So what? There were other people there before that! If anyone should have a moral right to the territory of Palestine (or as some call it, "Israel" -- but that's not what it was known as for those two thousand years, nor even before that!), it should obviously, by your own logic, be the (descendants of the) Ur-Canaanites! The evil Canaanaite-butchering Jews should, in view of that little piece of history, not be allowed to profit territorially from their (attempted?) genocide -- perhaps the first instance of such, at least the first historically recorded one ("The Mother of All Genocides", I'm sure they'd call it, if some other Middle-Eastern Semite bloke hadn't come up with that idiom first...). Their having "prayed" thrice a day for a couple millennia is of course neither here nor there -- except, if anything, as even more cause not to let them have it: It is nothing but a celebration of their victory (=genocide of the Ur-Canaanites), a horrendous crowing over the blood of the dispossessed that can only serve to further DIS-qualify them from ever being allowed to enjoy the fruits of their vicious blood-lust. There, that's what you get if you want to base the strength of your claim on how old it is. Sheesh... Are you really so stupid that that wasn't obvious, even long before you tried it?!? No wonder, then, that your argumentation is so reminiscent in style of that of the Serbs in regards to Croatia, Bosnia, and Kosovo: It's just as brain-dead, too! Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #18,779 by bluke 11/19/01 11:52:39 AM Reply	Do you know any Ur-Canaanites? I don't. Those nations ceased to exist at some point and therefore thereis no one to claim the land. The jews on the other hand have not, and have had a continous presence in Israel for thousands of years.
Post #18,800 by CRConrad 11/19/01 1:03:40 PM Reply	For suitably twisted values of "cease" and "continous". More droppings from BS-Looke: [Do you know any Ur-Canaanites?] I don't. Oh, I think I possibly do -- in which case, you know even more. You see, I don't think your semi-neolithic ancestors were 100% efficient in their genocide (Hey, I freely admit even mine weren't, and they were industrialised and everything!)... So some of the folks who were there before them, probably hung around after their arrival too. Or do you have some other explanation of where all those Samaritans, and other such peoples your holy books are full of, came from? And then, later on, after the Romans came, then began the Diaspora. The Jews left, History tells us... Does it say anything about what the non-Jews in the area did? The Romans didn't pull a Carthage on the whole country, did they -- "kill every living thing, sow the Earth with salt", that routine? So they probably just staid put, I'd guess... And that's your Ur-Canaanites right there: The Palestinians. Those nations ceased to exist at some point and therefore thereis no one to claim the land. Oh, those NATIONS "ceased to exist"...? You mean, like the NATION of Israel did, two thousand years ago? The jews on the other hand have not, and have had a continous presence in Israel for thousands of years. Not as a nation they haven't; no more than the Ur-Canaanites. Just a scattered splinter of a people, getting assimilated into / assimilating into itself the surrounding culture, like any other such scattered splinter of a people has always done. Funny how in your book, that counts as "continous presence" (for a "nation", no less...) -- while pretty much the exact same thing happening to the people who have their dicks uncut counter-clockwise in stead of clockwise, or whateverthefuck, counts as "ceased to exist". Now, if you want to be adamant that the Palestinians aren't the descendants of the Ur-Canaanites... AND at the same time, you want to claim that "a nation" of Jews lived on in Palestine after the Diaspora... Then what do you think would have happened to that "nation" about half a millennium later, with the rise of Islam? Well, what happened to EVERY fucking other people that wave rolled over? (And spare us the "JHVH fixed it somehow" craplications, OK? We're talking history here, not superstition-based fables.) Yup, that's right... They converted. So if the Palestinians aren't descended from the Ur-Canaanites, and thus vicitims of attempted genocide by the Israelites for the SECOND time... Then they must be descended from the Israelites themselves, for all I can see -- and thus the vicitims of attempted FRATRI-genocide by the Israelites' other descendants! That's your precious "nation" for you: The Mothers Of All Genocidists -- either repeat killers, or brother-slayers. Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #18,917 by bluke 11/20/01 3:19:00 AM Reply	I feel sorry for you It seems that you have a guilt complex about the holocaust and want to assuage your guilt by calling the Jews "The Mothers Of All Genocidist", after all if the Jews did it first the Nazis can't be that bad.
Post #18,957 by CRConrad 11/20/01 12:16:27 PM Reply	Bingo! I was pretty sure that little hook would work; that that was precisely what you were going to answer. Unfortunately -- for you, that is -- I think that reply says a lot more about you, than about me. Can you think of any other reasons I would have looked for that particular response...? Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #18,762 by a6l6e6x 11/19/01 11:08:41 AM Reply	Legalistic gooblygook at its finest. I would grant you the Israel as established in 1948. All else, belongs to someone else, be that Jordan, Egypt, the man on the moon, or a new Palestinian state. Jews that legitimately acquired property or otherwise live in what you wish to call "disputed" territory do not live in Israel but in this other state. They can be citizens of that other state or legal residents of that state. And, don't give me the "defensible borders" bullshit. If the Palestinians (not that they have a single voice) don't cede you any territories, you can't have it under any pretext. Certainly not by picking and choosing which UN resolutions to accept and which to reject and how to interpret the resolutions you wish to accept. And certainly not by simple conquest. The current Israeli policy seems to be -- "what's mine is mine, what's yours is ours, until we kill you off". Not a prescription for peace, ever! Unless you have in mind killing off all Muslims that might care about the issue. Or, as you are trying very hard to do, to convince someone else to do some of that for you. It is obvious to me that Israel by its actions, the "settlements" in particular, wants to perpetuate a war so it can gain territory. With the much superior military power, the lives lost to lives taken proportion is apparently totally acceptable. Your own flavor of the Taliban deems it so. That's how I see it from here. Alex Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. -- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
Post #18,778 by bluke 11/19/01 11:50:15 AM Reply	Based on what does all else belong to someone else Why should Egypt or Jordan have more of a claim on the West Bank then Israel? As I showed many times, the UN resolutions state that Israel should withdraw from "territories" NOT all the territories to "secure and recognized borders". The borders of 1948 were not secure and recognized and therefore can not be the basis of any settlement. One final question. The Arabs received 99.6% of all the land in the Middle East. Jordan received 80% of the original Palestine mandate, Isreal wants a little peice of that, so tell me who is grabbing land?
Post #18,789 by CRConrad 11/19/01 12:31:29 PM Reply	Same old same old BS from BS-Luke BS-Looke spouts some more typical Looke-BS: Why should Egypt or Jordan have more of a claim on the West Bank then Israel? How about you try to learn to read what's written, right in front of your nose? He SPECIFICALLY SAID, it's not about "who has a claim"; all we know, is that legally, Israel doesn't have one. Sheesh... As I showed many times, the UN resolutions state that Israel should withdraw from "territories" NOT all the territories to "secure and recognized borders". The borders of 1948 were not secure and recognized and therefore can not be the basis of any settlement. Pick and choose, pick and choose... The whole fucking existence of the state of Israel depends on that original UN resolution. And you think you can start dickering with that?!? (A few nicely prejudicial cheap shots come to mind...) Lissen, bubbele, if that resolution can be fucked with in one way, then it could quite concievably be messed with in other ways, too... You really sure you wanna go down THAT particular road? Naah... If the existence of the state of Israel is so fucking holy to you, then you fucking better take the whole of the resolution as Gospel. Either-or, no fucking raisin-picking! So the legitimate borders of Israel are those of the original resolution that created it; anything you've taken since then is a land-grab. (That's what "grab" means, "to take" -- look it up in a fucking encyclopedia...) One final question. The Arabs received 99.6% of all the land in the Middle East. You keep bandying that number about. Two questions arise, at least one but probably both of which have been asked before but never answered by you: 1) Where do you get them from? Show me some hard acreage numbers, square-miles or square-kilometres per country "in the Middle East". (That's where I suspect you get such an impressively tiny number, by dicking around with the definition of "Middle East". Does yours include China, or only India, Afghanistan, and Mongolia...?) A) So fucking WHAT?!? Some countries are bigger; others, smaller -- that's just the way it is. Should the Dutch be seen as "justified" to start killing of the Russians, just because the Dutch don't have as much fucking Lebensraum as the Russians do? Jordan received 80% of the original Palestine mandate, Isreal wants a little peice of that, so tell me who is grabbing land? Israel, of course. The fucking DEFINITION of "grabbing" is "to take something", i.e, it's about something you didn't have to begin with. Did Israel have those territories from its creation? No. So it must have TAKEN them. Q. E fucking D, beatable by straight-forward logic a third-grader could handle. Sheesh, is this the level of arguing all those Talmud schools are so renowned for??? Yeshiva, thine reputation seems to be a little overblown... Bryce, meet Blook. Blook, Bryce. Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #18,914 by Ashton 11/20/01 2:33:37 AM Reply	So then - take back the artificial creation of 'Saud'i 'Arabia' too? Pretty recent that. As arbitrary as with the Sudeten and other territorial disputes post-[this war or that]. We could then go on to the 'Gypsies' or Romani: [link\|http://dmoz.org/Society/Ethnicity/Romani/Holocaust/\|Seconds?] If.. in 20/01 hindsight the fairwitness decides that it was an error to 'reward' with a place to call 'home' - the miserable Jews for their execrable behavior, their abetting the crimes of their Nazi scapegoaters: by going too docilely through those Zyklon-B dispensing Brausebad doors into oblivion: (The wimps - we Know what We! would have done when the Geheime Staats Polizei came for Us, to resettle the family in those charming country camps in the film - Don't We? We'd have fought those jack-booted Party thugs with knives and forks. Fersure.. let little Sasha take her chances during the melee.) Well then, pick the Romani as new landlords, perhaps? And as always (given the absence still, of anything like a World Government) - why should not Any decision of any era or time: be questioned? Interminably, of course. No comment re ~ how I [as a Jew] might have superbly handled the daily fact of the surrounding territories to 'mine' (unless taken back by a fairwitness at any time?): that my neighbors have a concerted aim to evict me and all others - with extreme prejudice 24/7. I will not try to make the case that I would deal with this situation in some Christlike manner (since he wouldn't be my messiah then, either). After all, I'm not a fairwitness. Either. And my present country of occupancy - is dealing with a One-Day dose of terrorist bombing.. with such extreme moderation. Why just look at the gamut of measured responses - so far. Ashton With the Wisdom of Solomon I decree for the contending Mothers: Cut the babe in two. Next case. *For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution; and it is always wrong* H. L. Mencken, Mencken's Metalaw (courtesy Silverlock)
Post #18,918 by bluke 11/20/01 3:33:50 AM Reply	Same old lack of historical knowledge from you No one is "dickering" with the original resolution. Teh fact is that the Arabs REJECTED the original resolution. In 1967 the Security Council passed ANOTHER resolution (242), which stated that Israel should withdraw from "territories" not all the territories (read any account of the those sessions) to secure and recognized borders. Again, the borders of 1948 were cease fire lines not secure and recognized borders in fact they are completely different then the original UN resolution of 1947, therefore it was always clear that those borders were not permanent, what is so hard to understand. You write: "Did Israel have those territories from its creation? No. So it must have TAKEN them. " By the same token we can say did the US have the Southwest from its creating, No, so it must have taken them. Did Jordan have the West Bank when it was created? No. Did you or anyone else complain in 1948 that they TOOK the land. Let's take 1 example in Europe: Should France return Alsace-Lorraine, gained in 1945, Further, France should agree to the return and rehabilitation of all ethnic Germans expelled from Alsace-Lorraine after World Wars I and II, as well as all those they define as their descendants. This, of course, is just the first step toward a solution, as no aggression can be rewarded - and France has much other stolen territory to return. It took Corsica from Genoa, Nice and Savoy from Piedmont. As the successor state, Italy must get back all these lands. By similar token, territories grabbed from the Habsburgs go back to Austria, including Franche-Comt, Artois, and historic Burgundy. Just look at a any map of the region, see if you can even find Israel on the map, the name Israel is bigger then the country.
Post #18,916 by bluke 11/20/01 3:16:02 AM Reply	Amazing You must really hate Israel, give the West Bank to anyone BUT Israel. What connection does Egypt or Jordan have with the West Bank?
Post #18,989 by a6l6e6x 11/20/01 2:30:32 PM Reply	Re: Amazing No, not hating Israel. It has so many decent and fair minded people that have been mostly silenced lately. Perhaps hating what the current, and for that matter prior, government of it has and is doing with regards to the "settlements". It is a provocation of the worst kind. If you (collectively) do not see it as a provocation, you do not understand human nature. Apparently nothing has been learned from the Warsaw ghetto during World War II. Brutal oppression and occupation mean nothing to you. "Never Again!" apparently only means "Never Again to Us!". You are rubbing salt in to open wounds and are creating those Palestinian "martyrs" who being otherwise powerless against Israeli brutal military power have nothing to lose. I simply find it impossible to believe that you do not understand what you are doing. There is a larger agenda in play and justice or peace with your neighbors are not a part of it at present. First, you've got to get that Israeli percentage of the Middle East land mass, that you often talk about, up. Alex Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. -- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
Post #18,745 by jb4 11/19/01 9:15:07 AM Reply	By that logic... In fact, just about all 22 Arab states were created after WWI and are completely artificial. By that standard...The countires of eastern Europe, southeast Asia, Most of Africa, and the Orient are similarly artificial. That in no way illigitimizes them, however. And has been pointed out, this also, pointedly includes Isreal. jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #19,085 by bluke 11/21/01 2:41:22 AM Reply	My point was That they have no more rights to the West Bank then Israel does
Post #19,091 by jb4 11/21/01 8:53:32 AM Reply	...And no FEWER rights, either! Don't try to spin yourself into an untenable poisition. Just admit you put your foot into your mouth on this one and lets get on to more important things. jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #19,190 by Ashton 11/21/01 8:50:45 PM Reply	Boys.. Boys!!___ it's much simpler than that - I couldn't find it via a Google search: "Why Men Love War" + book A good look: the idea appears a Popular one for massive explanation. I do recall a book with that title from the '50s. Too. Prolly many others previous. Plus de choses changent, plus qu'ils restent les m\ufffdmes. The more things change... :[ Logic.. shall buy us Nothing in the infinite Whyfors? of the stimulus-response game, a mere fa\ufffdade for the neverending temptation to Prove (onceandforall) Mine's Bigger. {sigh} ..full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. W. Shakespeare RIP
Post #19,219 by CRConrad 11/22/01 2:16:05 PM Reply	Oh, quit being so offensively neutral, "boy"! Don't go fucking "boys" in the plural, as if they were somehow "equally to blame" for not seeing eye to eye! The fact is, Irish Whiskey is a reasonably reasonable shrewd debater, while Blooke is a one-eyed rabid fuckwit, spouting ludicrous "defenses" of a fucking fascistoid policy of genocide (or at least, "close enough for government work".) Jumping on Whiskey Boy "just as much", given that background (in your terms, Blooke's _I_S_ smaller), is fucking well offensive in and of itself. Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #19,236 by wharris2 11/22/01 9:30:54 PM Reply	Ooo Ooo And what am I? "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth
Post #19,258 by CRConrad 11/23/01 4:51:57 PM Reply	A wimp? Didn't we do this last week? :-) But hey, it's OK... You're our wimp! Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #19,239 by Ashton 11/22/01 10:08:51 PM Reply	Neutral! may ass Uniform maybe. This fucking death-besotted species is nosing around - as fucking Usual - for some next way to dare Everyone on show&tell: let's see Who IS Biggest? the #$$$# Xian techno-Armies? or one o' the other #\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd# He-God mobs with pitchforks & mustard gas & mind-erased Boys with Semtex bandoliers [??] Place yer bets. We ain't 'safe' with using language for reasoning - and we sure as shit ain't safe with nukes anywhere near any of us. Neutral!? - Hah: a fucking pox* on All the bloody techno-toy Armies, and especially: their Inciters, those sanctimonious old farts -bearded and bald- who send off the Boys to fuck-up as much as can be fucked-up. (God Made Me Do It. Again.) * a pox that s l o w s Everything down.. so's that some of that river of testosterone flow to the balls, can get diverted Upwards for awhile: to what's left of the species-brain. Or at least: Everyone Go Shopping. Or beat up a few Football watchers. Do something else inane, comfy and typical - that still screws up the planetary resources, only.. a bit s l o w e r. Any questions? {SheesH}
Post #19,386 by jb4 11/26/01 8:59:54 AM Reply	"Irish Whiskey"? Hmmmm... jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #19,632 by CRConrad 11/28/01 11:03:05 AM Reply	Yeah, they can't spell "Whisky". Or did'ya mean "JB" isn't Irish? Then what is it? (I'm fairly sure it isn't real Whisky, anyway.) Murkin Beuhbunn, perhaps? (And what the fuck does the Royal House of France have to do with some nekulturnyj Colonial maize-brew anyway?!?) Oh, who cares... I only drink the Grouse, anyway. Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #19,686 by Ric Locke 11/28/01 7:54:27 PM Reply	Either "J&B" (a pretty good blended whisky) though certainly not the best, or, more likely -- Johnnie Walker Black Label ("Jack Black"), top grade of the best, as you say, Murriacan Corn Squeezin's. Don't care for the stuff myself, but then, I'm the one who's unhappy that he can no longer get Doppelkorn Schnapps [the old-fashioned, pure-quill stuff, not the wimpy pepperminz c..p] Regards, Ric
Post #19,718 by jb4 11/29/01 1:46:32 PM Reply	Also There's Jim Beam (obviously no relation) which is yer basic hooch. But I feel your pain re: Doppelkorn... (But have you tried Ratzeputz...?) jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #19,753 by Ashton 11/29/01 8:36:04 PM Reply	Real Men\ufffd drink, er sip Armagnac.. (Women are too smart to)
Post #19,756 by Ric Locke 11/29/01 8:47:56 PM Reply	Armagnac? Fancy name and since I can't get doppelkorn, I shall simply have to find a car old enough to have a solid-brass radiator [funny, a couple dead ones right outside the window; fancy that] and go into business for myself. Hm. It's been awhile, and it's remarkable how many things are on the market today that look, er, really handy for such an enterprise. Especially the newfangled notion of deposit/return propane cylinders -- the gas ring from an old water heater, with about three-quarters of the slots closed up, connected to an RV regulator and a five-gallon cylinder, should be just the thing for gentle heating of, say, a fifty-gallon vat. Foo on woodcutting. I shall save my mesquite for barbecuing... by the way, clear corn-squeezins, with a bit of black pepper and a few other useful spices, makes a marvelous tenderizing marinade for venison. Co-conspirators? Regards, Ric
Post #19,757 by CRConrad 11/29/01 8:53:38 PM Reply	...for Apfelkorn! (Naah, not really.)
Post #19,783 by jb4 11/30/01 9:05:07 AM Reply	The trouble w/ Apfelkorn... ...is that it's too sweet for day-to-day drinking. It's very good on occasion, but it's not for front-line getting smashed.... jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #19,915 by wharris2 12/1/01 9:28:05 PM Reply	Only Jim Beam? There's also the (belch) Jack Daniels. "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth
Post #20,085 by jb4 12/3/01 1:47:24 PM Reply	But Jack's initials are NOT "JB" jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)

Welcome to IWETHEY!