P2P-Zone  

Go Back   P2P-Zone > Political Asylum
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 23-03-04, 12:40 PM   #41
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by miss_silver
I seriously doubt that.

If my mother would have been Jewish, I would have been too. Wether you're from USA,Canada, Europe, China, Japan, Russia North or South Africa or Australia, being born jewish is to be jewish, not american, not canadian... It just goes down with the bloodline according to their religion. Wether being white, yellow, black or purple with green dots, if your mother is jewish, it makes you a jewish person, wether practicant or not.

Strangely enough, If my father was jewish and my mother wasn't, I wouldn't be either
we could argue the semantics of what constitutes being jewish all day long the point was it was rather funny that in one post he's calling Israeli's a murdering, oppressing horde and then in the next breath saying "oh hey look i lowered my elitist standards and actually associate with some dirty jews, just so you don't think i'm anti-semetic"

it's funny and in line with his childish view of the world.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 01:42 PM   #42
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

where did i ever say "dirty" jew..or where did i even imply that they were dirty..ffs

full of very pathetic attempts of character assaination today zpan...

so what if i have jewish friends..do you know if i even discuss israel with them?
i can quite easily be a jew hater and know jewish people..
but regardless of how you try and paint me.. i dont hate them..

i probably would even say i am as wary of jews as i am of arabs..but thats beside the point..

you cant hold a political argument to save yourself..pretty fucn weak indeed..you have to be in this thread doing the tired old drag multi down to avoid the crux of the discussion..routine
the real action is elsewhere..lets see you drag that off topic..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 02:03 PM   #43
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by multi
where did i ever say "dirty" jew..or where did i even imply that they were dirty..ffs

full of very pathetic attempts of character assaination today zpan...

so what if i have jewish friends..do you know if i even discuss israel with them?
i can quite easily be a jew hater and know jewish people..
but regardless of how you try and paint me.. i dont hate them..

i probably would even say i am as wary of jews as i am of arabs..but thats beside the point..

you cant hold a political argument to save yourself..pretty fucn weak indeed..you have to be in this thread doing the tired old drag multi down to avoid the crux of the discussion..routine
the real action is elsewhere..lets see you drag that off topic..
don't try to run away from your anti-semetism now Mr.Brownshirt.

what is this "real action" and where exactly is "elsewhere"?

in fact...what the hell are you talking about? this thread is about glorifying the death of a horrible madman, let's keep it that way, OK?
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 02:25 PM   #44
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

so i am a fasict now..fcn lol lol
keep going..wahhhahaa..


all i see is a targeted assasination
of an important enemy figure..carried out exactly to plan..
using weapons sold by the US
(NOT for the purpose of attack)

defend the killing all you like..he was an old man..not many years left..i say they wanted to kill him before he died ...also i will say the people behind the palistinans and their agenda wanted it that way too
they werent going to let him die just like that no no..
they needed to kill a symbol..somthing that would hurt..enflame ..enrage..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 02:27 PM   #45
Sinner
--------------------
 
Sinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,379
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by schmooky007
hamas and the rest of the palestinian terror organizations, supported by the arab world and terror groups like al-kaeda and hizballah, are not fighting occupation. they are fighting against the existence of israel.

yassin was a murderous pig. yes he was in a wheelchair but that didn't stop him from taking part in terrorism. yassin signed a fatwa recently making it perfectly legitimate for women, even if they are pregnant, to become homicide bombers and murder israelis (in all, 80 women became homicide bombers, most of them sent by hamas. 7 exploded in israel, the rest were caught on their way to carry out an attack.

Israel did create Hamas did they not?

This is a very good read.........

Sharon's Terror Child
How the Likud Bloc Mid-wifed the Birth of Hamas

http://www.counterpunch.org/hanania01182003.html
__________________
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend
Sinner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 02:28 PM   #46
schmooky007
hi
 
schmooky007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,708
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by miss_silver
schmooky007

Ariel Sharon:The Jewish Hitler



The 'murderous pig' attribute goes both ways.
ohhh please.. is that the best you can do love?

i thought we were having an intelligent conversation, not a linking match.. and what's worst is the source.. a neo-nazi site. what i most admire about sharon is the way he always stood up against the arabs. an eye for an eye, give them a taste of their own medicine. see, the arabs are gonna kill jews anyway. if anyone is stupid enough to believe that what's taking place between arabs and israelis is because of so-called "israeli occupation" then they oughta get their head out of their arse (hint: there is NO israeli occupation taking place. israel didn't decide one day to simply march in and occupy the territories. these lands were won during war, a war that the arabs, as a collective, started.) like i said, the arabs will go on with the bloodshed. it's in their genes. they're cannibals. it doesn't matter if there's someone other than sharon in office. even when the leftist doves were running israel and were willing to give land to the arabs in exchange for peace the arabs continued to murder jews.
schmooky007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 08:18 PM   #47
schmooky007
hi
 
schmooky007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,708
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Sinner
Israel did create Hamas did they not?

This is a very good read.........

Sharon's Terror Child
How the Likud Bloc Mid-wifed the Birth of Hamas

http://www.counterpunch.org/hanania01182003.html
are you going to believe every crap you read out there? to answer your question, no, israel didn't create the hamas. the israeli government was interested in working with hamas to fight the PLO and reduce its influence in the territories, just like it served america's interests to work with the mujahideen and bin ladin in afghanistan in the 80s to fight the soviets and reduce its sphere of influence as well working together with saddam hussein during the iran-iraq war to fight against the new islamic revolution in iran.
schmooky007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 08:27 PM   #48
schmooky007
hi
 
schmooky007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,708
Default

and multi, since you constantly whine about how the west always supports israel and the unfairness of it all, here's an interesting article from the jerusalem post for you

Letters from London: Different strokes for different folks
By DOUGLAS DAVIS

If Osama bin Laden had been killed in the early hours of Monday morning, the sound of champagne corks popping in the Foreign Office would have echoed around London. British officials would have happily congratulated each other, and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw would have enthusiastically made the rounds of television studios to crow about "progress in the war on terror."

Somehow, Israel's war on terror means something quite different. Straw, currently in Brussels where he is, ironically, stiffening the wobbly spine of his European partners on terror in the wake of the Madrid bombings, was first out of the blocks with his denunciation of Israel's assassination of Ahmed Yassin.

The attack, he intoned, was "unacceptable" and "unjustifiable." Everyone understands Israel's need to protect itself against terrorism, but – and there is always a "but" when it comes to Israel's self-defense – "it is not entitled to go in for this kind of unlawful killing." Just four days earlier, Straw had told a joint press conference in London with his Italian counterpart, Franco Frattini, that, "Nobody can opt out of the war against terrorism. As far as the British, and I know the Italian governments, are concerned, nobody is going to opt out either." Nobody, apparently, except Israel. Different strokes for different folks.

But why is Israel's response to Hamas regarded as being so different from the West's response to its close cousin, al-Qaida? They are, after all, virtually indistinguishable in terms of ideological motivation, operational method and strategic objective.

Some argue that Straw is simply attempting to win back votes in his own heavily Muslim constituency; others argue that he is seeking to restore Britain's credibility within the European Union, where London – a full-blown combatant in the "war on terror" – is seen as Washington's patsy.

That might explain some of the motivation for Straw's apparently perverse response to the overnight developments in Gaza. But it is not the whole explanation. The point is that for Europeans Israel's battle against Islamic psychopaths who explode themselves in buses, bars, pizza parlors and discotheques are not part of their "war on terror."

While Europe is facing the imminent threat of dozens of its citizens being blown to smithereens, Israel is perceived to be engaged in a political-military struggle with a deprived, dispossessed nation that is seeking no more than the expression of its legitimate national aspirations.

If European political leaders have bothered to read the Hamas Charter, they have also chosen to suspend disbelief and simply discount the overwhelming message at the heart of that document: an absolute rejection of any negotiation with Israel and an uncompromising determination to destroy the Jewish state.

So when Israel targets the man who founded the organization, who embodied its zero-sum ideals, who inspired the deaths of hundreds of Israelis, it is regarded in the European councils of state as a noxious, hateful, illegitimate act.

The objectives that the Hamas Charter so clearly articulates – including a detailed religious justification for killing Jews – is simply overlooked in the frenetic drive to secure a "viable Palestinian state."

There is another deeply sinister reason for Israelis to be profoundly concerned about the European response to Yassin's death: Those who confidently asserted that the slaughter in Madrid would bring Europe to a greater understanding of Israel's predicament are dead wrong; on the contrary, as terrorist outrages permeate across the continent – and security experts are certain that they will – it is Israel that will bear the blame and European Jews who will feel the consequences.

Israel's "treatment of the Palestinians" and its "refusal to negotiate the establishment of a Palestinian state" are widely regarded among the political and media classes, as well as among the wider European public, as the progenitor of Islamic extremism and the source of Islamic terrorism. It is Israel, therefore, that is widely perceived to bear responsibility for having brought death and destruction on an industrial scale to the West.

Europe's leaders are always ready with a pro-forma condemnation when Israelis are killed, but there is no pro-forma condemnation of the killers. Rather, there is a profound and fundamental belief that Israel is the intransigent author of its own pain. I have lost count of the number of times European officials have told me: "Sharon is the problem. Arafat is the solution. And if you don't want Arafat today, you will have to deal with Hamas tomorrow."

In the face of further terrorist atrocities in Europe, there can be little doubt that Israel will ultimately pay the price, both political and economic. Nor can there be much doubt that European Jews will suffer the consequences of the virulent anti-Semitism that has been germinating across the continent since September 11, 2001. The stage has been set. It's show time. Again.
schmooky007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 08:29 PM   #49
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by multi


defend the killing all you like..he was an old man..not many years left..
all this "old man in a wheelchair" shit is funny, i guess now they know how relatives of Leon Klinghofer felt.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-03-04, 10:48 PM   #50
Sinner
--------------------
 
Sinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,379
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by schmooky007
are you going to believe every crap you read out there? to answer your question, no, israel didn't create the hamas. the israeli government was interested in working with hamas to fight the PLO and reduce its influence in the territories, just like it served america's interests to work with the mujahideen and bin ladin in afghanistan in the 80s to fight the soviets and reduce its sphere of influence as well working together with saddam hussein during the iran-iraq war to fight against the new islamic revolution in iran.

Did you read the article? What is false in it? The article pretty much says Hamas is a terrorist group. What I got out of it is the fact neither side wants peace, both sides are just content on killing each other.
__________________
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend
Sinner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-03-04, 05:25 AM   #51
tambourine-man
BANG BANG BANG (repeat as necessary)
 
tambourine-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Soon to be elsewhere
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by schmooky007
...like i said, the arabs will go on with the bloodshed. it's in their genes. they're cannibals. it doesn't matter if there's someone other than sharon in office...
*splutters coffee over the monitor*
I thought legend had it that it was the Jewish who stole Christian children and ate them... unless... no, surely not... the whole thing's bullshit?

Look, plain and simple. The root of the problem is that in 1947, the UN (under severe political pressure from the United States which bordered on illegal) passed an "agreement" which offered the Jews 55% of Palestine, even though they only owned 7% of it. In my opinion, the US was attempting to make the best effort they could in what was a dire, dire decade. The Palestinians refused to accept these decisions on the grounds that:

a) It was illegally imposed because of pressure from the US
b) It gave the Israelis the better part of the land
c) It would be used as a basis for further expansion

All three objections were entirely understandable - but essentially ignored.

Now sure, sure. A Palastinian 'state' never actually existed and there had never been an 'Independent Palestinian State'. Before 1918 it was part of the Ottoman Empire. After that, British Empire. Fair enough - but the land was almost exclusively occupied by Arabs with a small Jewish minority which (for the most part) lived peacefully side by side with those Arabs. 'The problem' only occured when the huge influx occurred, declaring ownership of the better parts of the region, under the claim that the Jewish God had promised the land. At the risk of being labelled an Anti-Semite - I would argue that such a course of action is bound to piss off any owner/occupiers. Put it this way, if Russia declared that 55% of the US or UK should be turned over to a group of people in diaspora and turned into an independant state - what do you think would happen? I'll hazard a guess, at the risk of being labelled a 'stuffed-shirt Brit', that the average American would fight to the death. Beleive it or not, the average Brit would think along similar lines. Believe this or not, the average Palestinian Arab has similar feelings.

The Palestinians and Israelis are both courageous and determined people. Both feel that if they lose this war they will be killed or dispossessed, whether that is realistic or not. Though I hate the idea of segregation, partition is the only way forward. That has to include some way of guaranteeing the security of both Israel and Palestine from incursion by the other side. That might mean stationing half a million troops on the frontier, but I can't see a realistic and presently achievable alternative.

There isn't just two sides to this story (pro-arab/anti-semite or pro-Israel/anti-terror), that's a foolish mistake to make. It's a very much a George Bush fallacy in the vein of 'you're either with us or against us'. It's also known as a 'false dichotomy'. Furthermore, you will be very hard pressed to find anybody in semi-educated real life who is actually dense enough to proclaim "Hitler would be very proud of you" in response to the suggestion that Israel had acted improperly, or that there appears to be a curious pattern to US support. In fact, this one of the biggest strawman fallacies I can imagine. Neither 'side' are law abiding, neither 'side' has any more territorial rights than the other and neither are justified in their attacks. This latest one will only perpetuate the situation.
__________________
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction" Dick Cheney - August 26, 2002

"I did not authorise the leaking of the name of David Kelly. Nobody was authorised to name David Kelly. I believe we have acted properly throughout" Tony Blair - July 22, 2003

Last edited by tambourine-man : 24-03-04 at 08:18 AM.
tambourine-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-03-04, 08:22 AM   #52
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by span
all this "old man in a wheelchair" shit is funny, i guess now they know how relatives of Leon Klinghofer felt.
my point really was..
he could of died next month from old age...
but neither the pals or israelis would of probably wanted that..

there is something ancient associated with the jews i really respect
is the cabbala/sepiroth
one of more important/powerful human symbols
i dont pretend to know all about it
but there is still much to be learnt
therein lies many answers
there is like most ancient ideas a beautiful colourful culture..
(i like ancient greek stuff for the same reason..)

anyway i cant say much against people who can only colour me a jew-hater

a jew-baiter or jew-investigator maybe


my respect for all cultures and races
of the world
past/future/present
has got nothing to do with how i may view the political agendas at any given point in time...
the lives of the innocent jews and the lives of the innocent arabs are of equal value and importance as the lives of anyone else in the world...to make out i think otherwise..is pretty futile..

Quote:
Here are some quotes from a magazine for Jews called "Moment". It is subtitled "The Jewish magazine for the 90's" These quotes are from the Aug 1996 edition after the Headline "Jews Run Hollywood - So What?":


"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential pruduction executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."

"The famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harbored anti-Semetic attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most powerful positions."
The head of Walt Disney studios is now the Jew Michael Eisner.
On studios that were bought out by the Japanese the magazine says:
"When Mitsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal's legendary - and all Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg, and Tom Pollack."

Here are some quotes from the paper "Jews Control the Media and Rule America"

"American Broadcasting Companies (ABC), Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS), and National Broadcasting Company (NBC). Each of these three has been under the absolute control of a single man over a long enough period of time-ranging from 32 to 55 years-for him to staff the corporation at every level with officers of his choosing and then to place his imprint indelibly upon it. In each case that man has been a Jew.
"Until 1985, when ABC merged with Capital Cities Communications, Inc...the chairman of the board of directors and chief executive officer (CEO) of the network was Leonard Harry Goldenson, a Jew...In an interview in the April 1, 1985 issue of Newsweek, Goldenson boasted 'I built this company (ABC) from scratch.'"
"CBS was under the domination of William S. Paley for more than half a century. The son of immigrant Jews from Russia..." "There has been no move by top G-E management to change the Jewish "profile" of NBC or to replace key Jewish personel. To the contrary, new Jewish executives have been added: an example is Steve Friedman..."
"The man in charge of the television entertainment division at CBS is Jeff Sagansky. At ABC the entertainment division is run by two men....nearly all of the men who shape young Amercians' concept of reality, of good and evil, of permissible and impermissible behavior are Jews. In particular, Sagansky and Bloomberg are Jews. So is Tartikoff. Littlefield is the only Gentile who has had a significant role in TV entertainment programming in recent years."
"American Film magazine listed the top 10...entertainment companies and their CEOs...Time Warner Communications (Steven J Ross, Jew) Walt Disney Co. (Michael D. Eisner, Jew)...Of the 10 top entertainment CEOs listed above, eight are Jews."
"The Newhouse media empire provides an example of more than a lack of real competition among America's daily newspapers; it also illustrates the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all organs of opinion... The Newhouse's own 31 daily newspapers, including several large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune; the nation's largest trade book publishing conglomerate, Random House, with all its subsideries; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the countries largest cable networks-the Sunday supplement Parade, with a circulation of more than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen major magazines, including the New Yorker, Vogue, Madamoiselle, Glamour, Vanity Fair, HQ, Bride's, Gentlemen's Quarterly, Self, Home&Garden...."
"Furthermore, even those newspapers still under Gentile ownership and management are so thoroughly dependent upon Jewish advertising..."
"The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post. These three...are the newspapers which set trends and guidlines for nearly all others. They are the ones which decide what is news and what isn't, at national and international levels. They originate the news; the others merely copy it. And all three newspapers are in Jewish hands...The Suzberger family also owns, through the New York Times Co. 36 other newspapers; twelve magazines, including McCall's and Family Circle..."
"New York's other newspapers are in no better hands than the Daily News. The New York Post is owned by billionare Jewish real-estate developer Peter Kalikow. The Village Voice is the personal property of Leonard Stern, the billionaire Jewish owner of..."
"There are only three newsmagazines of any note published in the United States: Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report....
The CEO of Time Warner Communications is Steven J. Ross, and he is a Jew.
"Newsweek, as mentioned above, is published by the Washington Post Co., under the Jewess Katherine Meyer Graham..."
"U.S. News & World Report... owned and published by Jewish real estate developer Mortimer B. Zucherman..."
" The three largest book publishers...Random House... Simon & Schuster , and Time Inc. Book Co....All three are owned or controlled by Jews...The CEO of Simon & Schuster is Richard Snyder, and the president is Jeremy Kaplan; both are Jews too."

"Western Publishing...ranks first among publishers of childrens books, with more than 50 per cent of the market. Its chairman and CEO is Richard Bernstein, a Jew."

"Jewish spokesmen customarily will use evasive tactics. "Ted Turner isn't a Jew!" they will announce..."
"We are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence on our political system and virtual control of our government; we also are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children..."
ok
so thats a little extreme in its presentation.:sorry ..but dont look like it was all made up..

so what about the bush family fortune being built from profits made from the holocaust...you are pretty silent on that one..
is it true?..if so why havent we heard more about it..?
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-03-04, 09:18 AM   #53
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by multi


so what about the bush family fortune being built from profits made from the holocaust...you are pretty silent on that one..
is it true?..if so why havent we heard more about it..?
hmmm...because it's not true maybe?

Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescott_Bush

Harriman Bank was the main Wall Street connection for German companies and the varied U.S. financial interests of Fritz Thyssen, who had been an early financial backer of the Nazi party until 1938, but who by 1939 had fled Germany and was bitterly denouncing Hitler. Dealing with Nazi Germany wasn't illegal until Hitler declared war on the US, but, six days after Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt signed the Trading With the Enemy Act. On October 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of Nazi German banking operations in New York City.

Prescott Bush's business interests seized under the act in October and November 1942 included:

* Union Banking Corporation (UBC) (for Thyssen and Brown Brothers Harriman)
* Holland-American Trading Corporation (with Harriman)
* the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation (with Harriman)
* Silesian-American Corporation (with Walker)

Bush's interest in UBC consisted of one share. For it, he was reimbursed $1,500,000.

Toby Rogers has claimed that Bush's connections to the Silesian-American Corporation resulted in his connection with the corporation's mining operations in Poland which used slave labor out of Oswiecim, where the Auschwitz concentration camp would later be constructed; however, such charges remain, essentially, unsubstantiated.
now remember multi, no horribly biased sources (i.e. counterpunch or OMGBUSHISANAZI.com) to try and back up your claims.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-03-04, 09:42 AM   #54
Sinner
--------------------
 
Sinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,379
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by tambourine-man

Look, plain and simple. The root of the problem is that in 1947, the UN (under severe political pressure from the United States which bordered on illegal) passed an "agreement" which offered the Jews 55% of Palestine, even though they only owned 7% of it. In my opinion, the US was attempting to make the best effort they could in what was a dire, dire decade. The Palestinians refused to accept these decisions on the grounds that:

a) It was illegally imposed because of pressure from the US
b) It gave the Israelis the better part of the land
c) It would be used as a basis for further expansion


BULLSHIT...Britain is to blame, plan and simple...not the US...nice try,

---quote---
In 1917, Lord Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, issued the Baltour Declaration, which promised British support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine providing that "nothing shall he done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities" - a reference to the Arabs, who then were 92 percent of the population. The declaration was interpreted by key Zionist leaders as support for a sovereign Jewish state.

In the wake of the Balfour Declaration, and during the British mandate, Jewish immigration increased. So, in proportion did sporadic strife between Arabs and Jews. Immigration nevertheless continued and in the 1930s - with the rise of Adolf Hitler - and after World War II, Jewish immigration increased still further. As British efforts to control it generated widespread disapproval in the West and stimulated underground warfare by militant Zionist units against British forces, Britain eventually placed the problem in the hands of the United Nations, which in 1947 voted to partition Palestine into Jewish and Arab States.

Fighting then flared up in Palestine. Six months later, when Britain withdrew and formation of the State of Israel was proclaimed, the Arabs went to war against the newly declared nation. As Jewish forces were victorious - and as stories spread that some 250 Arab civilians had been massacred in a village called Deir Yassin - thousands of Palestinians fled, among the first of today's 3.4 million refugees and exiles. Eventually the United Nations negotiated a truce, but fighting became endemic and war broke out again in 1956, 1967, and 1973. The 1967 war triggered underground warfare by Palestinian militants, whose attacks were primarily aimed at Israel, but also included strikes in Europe and hijackings on international air routes.
__________________
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend
Sinner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-03-04, 10:15 AM   #55
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

ok..ok
if its bullshit its bullshit..
thats all i wanted to know..

Quote:
six days after Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt signed the Trading With the Enemy Act. On October 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of Nazi German banking operations in New York City.
they left that part out didnt they..
__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-03-04, 10:25 AM   #56
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by multi
ok..ok
if its bullshit its bullshit..
thats all i wanted to know..



they left that part out didnt they..
uh...no they didn't, it's even in the text i quoted
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-03-04, 10:38 AM   #57
multi
Thanks for being with arse
 
multi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by span
uh...no they didn't, it's even in the text i quoted
from the clamor mag artical i ment
but..


http://www.clamormagazine.org/featur...3_feature.html
oops...lol it was right at the end..
i didnt remember it(slightly long read)
Quote:
Six days after Pearl Harbor and the US declaration of war at the end of 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau and US Attorney General Francis Biddle signed the Trading With the Enemy Act, which banned any business interests with US enemies of war. Prescott Bush continued with business as usual, aiding the Nazi invasion of Europe and supplying resources for weaponry that would eventually be turned on American solders in combat against Germany.

On October 20, 1942, the U.S. government had had enough of Prescott Bush and his Nazi business arrangements with Thyssen. Over the summer, The New York Tribune had exposed Bush and Thyssen, whom the Tribune dubbed "Hitler's Angel." When the US government saw UBC's books, they found out that Bush's bank and its shareholders "are held for the benefit of ... members of the Thyssen family, [and] is property of nationals ... of a designated enemy country." The list of seven UBC share holders was:

E. Roland Harriman – 3991 shares
Cornelis Lievense – 4 shares
Harold D.Pennington – 1 share
Ray Morris–– 1 share
Prescott S. Bush – 1 share
H.J. Kouwenhoven – 1 share
Johann G. Groeninger – 1 share.

The UBC books also revealed the myriad of money and holding companies funneled from the Thyssens and the government realized UBC was just the tip of the iceberg. On November 17, 1942, The US government also took over the Silesian American Corporation, but did not prosecute Bush for the reasons Higham noted earlier. The companies were allowed to operate within the Government Alien Property custodian office with a catch – no aiding the Nazis. In 1943, while still owning his stock, Prescott Bush resigned from UBC and even helped raise money for dozens of war-related causes as chairman of the National War Fund.

After the war, the Dutch government began investigating the whereabouts of some jewelry of the Dutch royal family that was stolen by the Nazis. They started looking into books of the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart. When they discovered the transaction papers of the Silesian American Corporation, they began asking the bank manager H.J. Kounhoven a lot of questions. Kouwenhoven was shocked at the discovery and soon traveled to New York to inform Prescott Bush. According to Dutch intelligence, Kouwenhoven met with Prescott soon after Christmas, 1947. Two weeks later, Kouwenhoven apparently died of a heart attack.

1950s: Bush Sells UBC Stock

By 1948, Fritz Thyssen's life was in ruins. After being jailed by the Nazis, he was jailed by the Allies and interrogated extensively, but not completely, by US investigators. Thyssen and Flick were ordered to pay reparations and served time in prison for their atrocious crimes against humanity.

On February 8, 1951, Fritz Thyssen died bitterly in Argentina at the age of 78. Thyssen was angry at the way he was treated by Europe after the war and how history would remember him as Hitler's most important and prominent financier.

When Thyssen died, the Alien Property Custodian released the assets of the Union Banking Corporation to Brown Brothers Harriman. The remaining stockholders cashed in their stocks and quietly liquidated the rest of UBC's blood money.

Prescott Bush received $1.5 million for his share in UBC. That money enabled Bush to help his son, George Herbert Walker Bush, to set up his first royalty firm, Overby Development Company, that same year. It was also helpful when Prescott Bush left the business world to enter the public arena in 1952 with a successful senatorial campaign in Connecticut. On October 8th, 1972, Prescott Bush died of cancer and his will was enacted soon after.

In 1980, when George H.W. Bush was elected vice president, he placed his father's family inherence in a blind trust. ...





__________________

i beat the internet
- the end boss is hard
multi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-03-04, 06:43 PM   #58
miss_silver
Keebeck Canuck
 
miss_silver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Close to a border of LUNATICS
Posts: 1,771
Default

Oh please on ya

Will reply on this one in the morning, been on a 2 day cooking spree + a major cleaning of the place.

It's not a neo-nazi site, why would you think this? It's prolly the german cross on the isralie flag that might have did the trick? Imo, it was made to provoke.

well, gotta get back to that brocco cream now

Quote:
Originally posted by schmooky007
ohhh please.. is that the best you can do love?

i thought we were having an intelligent conversation, not a linking match.. and what's worst is the source.. a neo-nazi site. what i most admire about sharon is the way he always stood up against the arabs. an eye for an eye, give them a taste of their own medicine. see, the arabs are gonna kill jews anyway. if anyone is stupid enough to believe that what's taking place between arabs and israelis is because of so-called "israeli occupation" then they oughta get their head out of their arse (hint: there is NO israeli occupation taking place. israel didn't decide one day to simply march in and occupy the territories. these lands were won during war, a war that the arabs, as a collective, started.) like i said, the arabs will go on with the bloodshed. it's in their genes. they're cannibals. it doesn't matter if there's someone other than sharon in office. even when the leftist doves were running israel and were willing to give land to the arabs in exchange for peace the arabs continued to murder jews.
miss_silver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-04, 01:34 AM   #59
tambourine-man
BANG BANG BANG (repeat as necessary)
 
tambourine-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Soon to be elsewhere
Posts: 1,327
Default

Admittedly I left out Balfour as I see it as having little relevance to the current situation. My mistake. The Balfour Devclaration (and others before it) were a series of shitty attempts to ease the tension within the Arab population, after breaking free of Ottoman rule. I say shitty as they turned out to be worth less than the paper they were written on.

As you'll know, Arab tensions grew with over 500 Jews killed between (I think) 1936 and 1939, during which, the Peel Commission originally suggested the idea of partition - the Zionists accepted but understandably, the Arabs did not. The 1939 White paper restricting Jewish immigration did not exactly help matters - although it went some way to easing Arab fears, there are still those who will site the 1939 paper as Anti-semite or Holocaust supporting. Again, I suspect that it was a genuine attempt to intervene in what was (and is) an impossible mission.

After the British turned over control to the UN, the 1947 Partition was made under Rsolution 181. If you don't believe that this was made under duress from the US, then fine - I won't push you. But please let's not get into a 'who's the biggest asshole country' debate - it'll be neck and neck. As I said, I don't blame the US for it's actions - I reckon theirs was a genuine attempt, but as illegal and as ham-fisted as any other attempt - including those made by the UK (infact, the blame-game really goes nowhere - I thought the thrust of my argument was more about the fact that I cannot easily criticise a nation (if not a 'state') of people who are under occupation based on a flimsy religious claim and the 'word of God').

My point still remains that if the US/UK were told by Russia (or the UN) that 55% of its land (the better part of the land) had to be given away to a group of people in diaspora, and that it would lead to an independant state, AND that the current population of the US/UK had no real say in this matter..... you'd fight to your last breath - and rightly so.
__________________
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction" Dick Cheney - August 26, 2002

"I did not authorise the leaking of the name of David Kelly. Nobody was authorised to name David Kelly. I believe we have acted properly throughout" Tony Blair - July 22, 2003
tambourine-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-04, 02:20 PM   #60
miss_silver
Keebeck Canuck
 
miss_silver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Close to a border of LUNATICS
Posts: 1,771
What The?

Quote:
Originally posted by schmooky007
ohhh please.. is that the best you can do love?

i thought we were having an intelligent conversation, not a linking match.. and what's worst is the source.. a neo-nazi site. what i most admire about sharon is the way he always stood up against the arabs. an eye for an eye, give them a taste of their own medicine. see, the arabs are gonna kill jews anyway. if anyone is stupid enough to believe that what's taking place between arabs and israelis is because of so-called "israeli occupation" then they oughta get their head out of their arse (hint: there is NO israeli occupation taking place. israel didn't decide one day to simply march in and occupy the territories. these lands were won during war, a war that the arabs, as a collective, started.) like i said, the arabs will go on with the bloodshed. it's in their genes. they're cannibals. it doesn't matter if there's someone other than sharon in office. even when the leftist doves were running israel and were willing to give land to the arabs in exchange for peace the arabs continued to murder jews.
First and foremost of all, we are talking about the palestinian population here, Not the whole Northen Africa arab population. Second of all, not all arabs are follower of the Koran.Third, what is an arab or arabia?. Forth What actually does constitute an occupation? IMO, any nations who controls the development of another nation is an occupation force. Basically your response for this is

Like I asked you earlier, What makes you think it's a neo-nazi site? If you were to explore it more, you'd discover that The Ariel Sharon Caracter is only a small part if it. Just try and take another look if you dare! you'll discover many more atrocities perpetrated by another type of terrorists And you might not like it a bit.

True, On this one, i'll conceed. The islamist religion is truly against anything that does not represent their religious and political values. Recently read some verses of the koran (only wish to have the book at hand to study it more). To make a long point short, if the quotes i've read on the web are true, The Follower of the Koran must islamised all the non beleivers and if they do not convert, the non beleivers inturn becomes 'the Infidels'. It is a very radical point of view imho. So either you bow to Islam and be 'saved' or you go straight to 'hell' according to the Koran... Now this does remind me of another long time standing religion that is caugh, caugh, now practiced by most of the western countries. Also True that the Koran is devoted to the almost systematic erradication of the Jewish ppl, why is that?

According to some research i've recently done and to quote you again on this

Quote:
like i said, the arabs will go on with the bloodshed. it's in their genes. they're cannibals. it doesn't matter if there's someone other than sharon in office
Considering that both 3 religions, Christianity, Islam and Judaisim holds the same prophet from the old testament, it's a pretty safe assumption to say that they all sprung from the same source. Christianity came form the Christ (the annointed one). Several Israelites converted to chirstianity after the death of christ...then again later on around 622, Mohammed had already 40 followers??? all of them were mostly semetic.

Quote:
Arabia is the cradle of Islam and, in all probability, the primitive home of the Semitic race.
from

So i'd be carefull about the arab genes statement if I were you since they were all arabs in the first place before all that religion shit messed it up... Either it was Christianity, Islamisim or Judaisim, they all share the same original gene pool, like it or not! Do you truly beleive that Jesus was white? Newsflash, either he was an arab or an essinian (still from arab decendence).

Imho, there is no solution about the israel-palestine crises, They will keep destroying eachother until they are no one left of the other faith. It's very true that the Jewish ppl are truly surrounded by a mostly muslim faith that the extremist uses also use as excuses for ethnic clensing, the zionist actually does the same thing ''deep chill in my bones''

The only truly thing i'm arguing here is that the Isralies even though surrounded, does not play it smart! To them, Yassir is truly more powerful dead than he was alive, because of these actions, there will be more bloodshed of isralites and palestinians. It is also true that if the US stop sending money to the state of Israel, they will prolly meet their creator sooner than they expected. It's also a truth that no US weapons should be used to exterminate any palestinians 'rebels' leader. Israel, by using the money the US is sending them to subjugate the palestinian ppl also invites more attacks on the american ppl by terrorists cells.

Just to give you an example on this... My ex boyfriend has a jewish friend that is totally into Sharon's view. The first thing he said about 9/11 was that it must surely have been the 'dirty palestinians' who did it!!! It truly was it's first reaction! I did let it rant all he wanted for the sake of the friendship between him and my ex.

So in this light, we have the old judaisim religion opposed by the newly (600 years later after christ) formed islamist religion.

Both sprang from the same roots... now who is right and who is wrong

Both are wrong, infact any religion who proclaim that if they (you) do not embrace their views, you'll be damned to hell... that's a scary thought.

But to come back on track about out contreversial Ariel Sharon figure, here are some facts... To quote again from the same caugh caugh so labeled neo-nazi site

.
Quote:
Sharon was born in Kfar Malal in 1928. At the age of 14, he joined the Haganah, and at 20, headed an infantry company in the Alexandroni Brigade during the 1948 War of Independence, during which the Israeli forces drove an estimated 300,000 Palestinians from their land, using some of the same genocidal methods against unarmed civilian populations that were used in the recent IDF invasion of the Palestinian Authority’s Area A territory.
Quote:
In 1953, Sharon founded “Unit 101,” a secret death squad within the IDF that committed several mass murders of civilians. In October 1953, Sharon’s “Unit 101” massacred 66 innocent civilians during a cross-border raid into the Jordanian West Bank village of Qibya. Under intense machine-gun fire, local residents were driven into their homes, which were then blown up around them, killing the occupants by burying them alive in piles of rubble. The April 2002 IDF massacre at the Palestinian refugee camp in Jenin was, in fact, modeled on Sharon’s “Unit 101” operations at Qibya.
Quote:
carried out another horrific war crime: In three separate incidents, Sharon- and Eytan-led units murdered Egyptian prisoners of war, as well as civilian Sudanese workers who had been captured. All told, 273 unarmed prisoners were executed and dumped into mass graves. When the story broke, nearly 40 years later, in the Aug. 16, 1995 London Daily Telegraph, it nearly ruptured Israeli-Egyptian relations. This was less than three months before Sharon would bloody his hands once again, by orchestrating the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Rabin, in Sharon’s eyes, had committed the mistake of signing a peace treaty with Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat.
Should I go on?

Now if you could come up with some valid numbers of Palestinian killed at the Hand of Sharon vs the Isralies killed at the hands of the palestinians we could begin some serious talk about this horrid matter.

Also imho, It is sad to compare palestinians as terrorists considering that there weapon is they body and life against Israel weapon power provided by the good ole USofA.

No, Yassir was no saint, he was as sick as Ariel Sharon is right now.

This just to tell that the 'Holy war' is far from over if both sides want's to keep anahilates themselves.
miss_silver is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© www.p2p-zone.com - Napsterites - 2000 - 2024 (Contact grm1@iinet.net.au for all admin enquiries)