dude, i repeat my last - we either speak straight business or we don't speak at all. all this skillfull verbal zigzaging either means you hold everyone here for complete fools, or you don't really have anything to say.

you made a falsification by carefully quoting the convenient parts, while blurring the remaining picture. telling half truth - even though throwing a hint 'bout "look up the rest yourself" - means you either didn't read the article, or you hope the rest won't.

_bad_taste_ :twisted:

p.s. didn't i say it already...?

Quote from: "Qulevra"

http://www.menapress.com/article.php?sid=1479

plus, consider googling whatever you haven't. it'll give you a lot of insight on what's really going on. Black September in Jordan and civil war in Lebanon are only the tip of the iceberg.

Your link is purely an OpEd article and shouldn't be used as fact.
When a news article uses the words, whine, gripe and cowardice, you know it's not fact-driven journalism.

As far as Black September and the civil war in Lebanon, I am not in disagreement that there are many militant factions in the Middle East region, and none of them should be considered saints.

My opinion is geared more towards the Israeli/Palestinian dynamic, and even though that is in play to an extent, I believe it is outside the scope of this thread, so I won't comment further on that.

dude, you keep talking in general terms. that's extremely bad taste.

what are the "factions" you're talking about ? did you even bother look for anything ? here, tell me something : if the same "faction", as you put it, is directly associated with a National Liberation Movement, yet still attempts 2 (two) coupes in less than 10 years, in 2 different countries, whose population is of the same ethnical group, what do you call it ? here's something else for ya - the same "faction" repeatedly attacks sovereign nation's civilian population. sounds familiar ?

p.s. Uchiha Itachi was more attentive than i, cudos to him. one thing i have to say to you - if this is the discussion level you pursure, you can sure as hell count me out of it. i don't trade in falsifications.

please, save the BS for someone else.

read my last 'bout tabloids - if you consider Amnesty, CPT and the rest for reliable source, we have little to talk about.

Quote from: "Qulevra"

p.s. i just typed in "American oppression of Indians" and got the same result. does it mean ya'll should be tried for an attempted genocide of native American population ?

No. Tell me who alive is responsible for genocide against American Indians.

The Israeli treatment of Palestinians has been likened to the treatment of Africans by the South African white minority, labelled as Apartheid.

In my opinion, if I turned on CNN and saw Syrian or Iranian tanks rolling victorious in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, I think the world would be a safer place.

that's just hilarious :lol: using your own logic, who do you think should be tried for "oppression of Palestinians" ? i want a full list - name, dates, crimes etc.
tabloids don't count, history books do.

and regarding your last little gem - that's the quickest way to get banned. i hope the mods here will agree.

When did I not demonstrate knowledge of the word Palestine? I said early in the thread that Britain controlled the territories that are now referred to as Israel and Palestine. These colonies were called Trans-jordan and Palestine. After WWII, in 1948, the UN voted to split up this territory because most other countries had given up their colonial holdings. In addition, some of the Jewish refugees from the Holocaust were part of the Zionist movement to form a Jewish homeland. In the wake of that atrocity, the world voted to give them one, which was created out of Trans-jordan and Palestine thus uprooting anyone who was living there prior to 1948. This is where both Palestinian, and "poor, mistreated Palestinian" comes from.

wrong.

***

the name "Palestina" (later transmuted to "Palestine") was given by Romans, after the desecration of the 2nd Temple in 70 AD, following the Jewish revolt against Romans (note that Judea/Samaria were provinces under Roman Empire); the purpose of the given name was to root out the link between the people and the land.

the population back then was mixed, since the land was conquered hundreds of years before by Babylonians, who deported large part of the population. then, when the Greeks/Macedonians conquered the Persians, there was a Greek influx.

note that the whole shebang around the area was because it was a center of a major trade route coming from Egypt.

naturally, the migration was very high and a lot of ethnicities were mixed.

still, despite all the deportations and revolts (there was another one in 135AD, known as Bar-Kochba revolt), Jews kept coming back. they mostly populated the northern areas (biblical citiy of Zfat, for example), with small groups in Jerusalem.

and only in 638AD, Jerusalem was conquered by Muslims, which declared all non-Muslims (Jews and Christians) 2nd class citizens, killing the pagans in the process. there was some migration, but the population largely remained the same.

in 1071AD, the Seljuk Turks conquered Jerusalem. then, the crusades came. over the next few centuries, the majority of the population became Arabic speaking Muslims. that doesn't mean the population was replaced by Arabs from the Arabian peninsula, just that they converted their language and religion. the Turkish Ottoman Empire took over in 1517 and invited Jews from the Mediterranean area to resettle in the Ottoman Empire, including Palestine.

the 19th Century was one of change. the Napoleonic wars and the mismanagement of the Ottoman Empire caused a lot of the population to leave for better locales. the Zionist movement started and Jewish and ethnic Arab population started to grow. by 1880, out of a population of 400,000, 24,000 (6%)were Jews. by 1914 the population had risen to 700,000 and the Jewish population was 85-100,000 (12-14%).

the British and French came to an agreement on how they were going to divide the Ottoman Empire in the ME. the only problem was, Britain also promised some of the same land to their Arab allies (Lawrence of Arabia) in exchange for help against the Turks. the Brits established the British Mandate area for a Jewish and Palestinean state that later became Trans-Jordan.

***

that's quite a piece of history you've missed.

now, for the "mistreated Palestinians". i'm pretty tired of typing, but i strongly suggest you to google "Black September" and "Egypt in Gaza".

also, you'll be pretty surprised to find out that the territories occupied (never annexed - which was a mistake) during the 6 Days War in 1967 (East Jerusalem, Samaria etc) and Yom Kippur War in 1973 (Sinai, Gaza strip), have _no_relation_whatsoever_ to the so-called "Palestinian people". as a matter of fact, the name "Palestinian people" was never heard before 1964. and while you're on it, google "Israeli Arabs" too.

What parts of my historical interpretation do you disagree with? I always try to be accurate, and as far as I know all of what I have said is so.

i don't have to disagree with you. history, however, does.

should i start with ancient history, or the modern one ? you don't seem to even know where the word "Palestine" comes from, left aside the "poor, mistreated Palestinian people"...

-double post-