UN votes 128-9

[Trapper John]

Because Israel is in violation of international law regarding stealing land and building settlements, including disputed territory of Jerusalem. A large number of resolutions exist against Israel for that but international law doesn't apply to Israel, or the US.

What has it got to do with the US where another country's capital city is?

The US has to put it's embassy in the other country's capital. The US has decided to agree with Israel on where it's capital should be.

International law is fucking joke as is the UN. Maybe they should be worried about conflicts that are killing people as.opposed to where people want their capital to be.

I hate to be the one to break it to you but just because they're not White it doesn't mean Palestinians aren't people

I hate to break this to you, but like the UK considers those northern counties in Ireland, part of the UK, Israel considers Jerusalem as part of Israel.

You are quite right MD, we do consider Northern Ireland part of the UK because like in Jerusalem and the other cities in what was once known as lesser Transjordan, the MAJORITY of people living in Nortern Ireland want to be British.

Of course in a world obsessed with minorities and a pathological hatred of majorities - minorities are always heard first.

[wutang]

Jerusalem seems to me like the perfect and rightful choice for the Israeli Capital, I mean just their 3500 year historical association with the place should give them more than enough right.

Interesting concept that, historical right.

I wonder if you extend it to say, the Native Americans or the Aborigines. Surely they have a right to claim ownership of any part of their homelands from the recent inhabitants

Hell, Maddogs home state of Texas was mexican long before any white americans moved in. Now the mexican people are moving back surely they have a historical right to demand ownership of it

[Trapper John]

Jerusalem seems to me like the perfect and rightful choice for the Israeli Capital, I mean just their 3500 year historical association with the place should give them more than enough right.

Interesting concept that, historical right.

I wonder if you extend it to say, the Native Americans or the Aborigines. Surely they have a right to claim ownership of any part of their homelands from the recent inhabitants

Hell, Maddogs home state of Texas was mexican long before any white americans moved in. Now the mexican people are moving back surely they have a historical right to demand ownership of it

Thats just a ridiculous argument because those examples bear no relationship to the Jew/Arab conflict. Both the Native Americans and Australian aborigines have their own homelands anyway and pretty much self governence. The Mexicans of course would have no case at all as they would have displaced native indians, being of colonialist Spanish and Portuguese stock.

You will also find that there is a very good reason why they don't try to claim sole sovreignty over their 'native' homelands

[Lady Murasaki]

Israel is the old divide and conquer tactic.

[wutang]

Thats just a ridiculous argument because those examples bear no relationship to the Jew/Arab conflict. Both the Native Americans and Australian aborigines have their own homelands anyway and pretty much self governence.

The same can be said of Israel so why do they insist on stealing more and more of the Palestinian's land? They have an internationally recognised capital in Tel Aviv so why insist on Jerusalem which was designated neutral by the UN when IT created Israel in the first place.

The Mexicans of course would have no case at all as they would have displaced native indians, being of colonialist Spanish and Portuguese stock.

Talking about Mexico the country which owned Texas before the white Americans moved in. Surely they have an historical right to it back.

And what stock do you think most Jews are? Polish and Russian. There ancestors are as less likely to have been of the middle east as the average Mexican is from North America


Ironically these guys ethnicity is Sephardi Jewish



People from Spain and Portugal. Maybe he is a Mexican as well

[wutang]

Another historical fact for you TJ

Jerusalem was not part of the historical Kingdom of Israel. It was part of the Kingdom of Judah.

[Trapper John]

Israel is the old divide and conquer tactic.

Explain?

Had you read my earlier post you will have seen that despite siding against us with the Germans and Turks, the Arabs were given 80% of Palestine wholly to themselves. The other 20% they were told was to be shared with any others, with the representatives of majority peoples living there having total governance of the area.

Thats as it was and is now, it's Arabs as usual who want to change that coz it doesn't suit them now for political reasons when it was absolutely fine for almost a century before.

[wutang]

Had you read my earlier post you will have seen that despite siding against us with the Germans and Turks, the Arabs were given 80% of Palestine wholly to themselves. The other 20% they were told was to be shared with any others, with the representatives of majority peoples living there having total governance of the area.

Thats as it was and is now, it's Arabs as usual who want to change that coz it doesn't suit them now for political reasons when it was absolutely fine for almost a century before.

Zionists were murdering Brits right up until the UK said 'fuck it let them have the land'. So if your arguement is 'dont reward people who fucked with us' its a bit weak.

Also the Arab nationalists fought alongside Britain in breaking up the Ottoman empire. Laurence of Arabia and all that.

The new rulers were hand picked by Britain because they were more likely to look out for UK imperial interests.

[Trapper John]

Another historical fact for you TJ

Jerusalem was not part of the historical Kingdom of Israel. It was part of the Kingdom of Judah.

There is no end to the argument as scholars disagree with each other. The opinion of most has always been that Judah was part of the united kingdoms of Israel and Soloman, King of the Israelites built his temple and ruled from Jerusalem.

[wutang]

Another historical fact for you TJ

Jerusalem was not part of the historical Kingdom of Israel. It was part of the Kingdom of Judah.

There is no end to the argument as scholars disagree with each other. The opinion of most has always been that Judah was part of the united kingdoms of Israel and Soloman, King of the Israelites built his temple and ruled from Jerusalem.

You mean it was conquered by the Israelites. Doesnt look like a solid argument for keeping it, cos y'know the Arabs can just argue the same

[Trapper John]

Had you read my earlier post you will have seen that despite siding against us with the Germans and Turks, the Arabs were given 80% of Palestine wholly to themselves. The other 20% they were told was to be shared with any others, with the representatives of majority peoples living there having total governance of the area.

Thats as it was and is now, it's Arabs as usual who want to change that coz it doesn't suit them now for political reasons when it was absolutely fine for almost a century before.

Zionists were murdering Brits right up until the UK said 'fuck it let them have the land'. So if your arguement is 'dont reward people who fucked with us' its a bit weak.

Also the Arab nationalists fought alongside Britain in breaking up the Ottoman empire. Laurence of Arabia and all that.

The new rulers were hand picked by Britain because they were more likely to look out for UK imperial interests.

I'm well aware what Jewish terrorists did and that wasn't my argument, the fact is they were given 80% of Palestine exclusively. The 20% which happened to have more Jews than anyone else administered the area which included Jerusalem.

The fact that they made a productive go of the bit they controlled has always rankled Arabs who largely let their bit remain in the same sand and shit it had for milennia.

[McAz]

Had you read my earlier post you will have seen that despite siding against us with the Germans and Turks, the Arabs were given 80% of Palestine wholly to themselves. The other 20% they were told was to be shared with any others, with the representatives of majority peoples living there having total governance of the area.

Thats as it was and is now, it's Arabs as usual who want to change that coz it doesn't suit them now for political reasons when it was absolutely fine for almost a century before.

Zionists were murdering Brits right up until the UK said 'fuck it let them have the land'. So if your arguement is 'dont reward people who fucked with us' its a bit weak.

Also the Arab nationalists fought alongside Britain in breaking up the Ottoman empire. Laurence of Arabia and all that.

The new rulers were hand picked by Britain because they were more likely to look out for UK imperial interests.

I'm well aware what Jewish terrorists did and that wasn't my argument, the fact is they were given 80% of Palestine exclusively. The 20% which happened to have more Jews than anyone else administered the area which included Jerusalem.

The fact that they made a productive go of the bit they controlled has always rankled Arabs who largely let their bit remain in the same sand and shit it had for milennia.

More accurately, America in pursuit of its own ends ensured they made a productive go of it. US funding to Israel at least $120 billion since the second world war but just $4 billion for Palestine. (Source: Congressional Research Service).

[Trapper John]

Another historical fact for you TJ

Jerusalem was not part of the historical Kingdom of Israel. It was part of the Kingdom of Judah.

There is no end to the argument as scholars disagree with each other. The opinion of most has always been that Judah was part of the united kingdoms of Israel and Soloman, King of the Israelites built his temple and ruled from Jerusalem.

You mean it was conquered by the Israelites. Doesnt look like a solid argument for keeping it, cos y'know the Arabs can just argue the same

As I understand it, it was a mutual agreement not a military conquest. The Southern Levant which includes Judah and Israel was sparsely populated by largely nomadic tribes and small settlements. They agreed to a central goverance by an excepted king, Soloman, for mutual protection as much as anything else.

Such was their freedom of choice that when Soloman died the Northern tribes of Israel refused to accept his son as king. The important thing here is that they were all Israelites, the only difference was the tribes name. The southern part of Levant was called Judah and remained loyal to the House of David, Solomans tribe, joined by the tribe of Benjamin. The other tribes remained in the north and called it Israel - but they were all Israelites and Jews.

[Trapper John]

Had you read my earlier post you will have seen that despite siding against us with the Germans and Turks, the Arabs were given 80% of Palestine wholly to themselves. The other 20% they were told was to be shared with any others, with the representatives of majority peoples living there having total governance of the area.

Thats as it was and is now, it's Arabs as usual who want to change that coz it doesn't suit them now for political reasons when it was absolutely fine for almost a century before.

Zionists were murdering Brits right up until the UK said 'fuck it let them have the land'. So if your arguement is 'dont reward people who fucked with us' its a bit weak.

Also the Arab nationalists fought alongside Britain in breaking up the Ottoman empire. Laurence of Arabia and all that.

The new rulers were hand picked by Britain because they were more likely to look out for UK imperial interests.

I'm well aware what Jewish terrorists did and that wasn't my argument, the fact is they were given 80% of Palestine exclusively. The 20% which happened to have more Jews than anyone else administered the area which included Jerusalem.

The fact that they made a productive go of the bit they controlled has always rankled Arabs who largely let their bit remain in the same sand and shit it had for milennia.

More accurately, America in pursuit of its own ends ensured they made a productive go of it. US funding to Israel at least $120 billion since the second world war but just $4 billion for Palestine. (Source: Congressional Research Service).

Well I expect that had the Arabs been as congenial as the Jews were for as long as they were/ are and didn't go around murdering everyone they came upon if they weren't muslim, then they'd have had a worldwide network of relatives willing to cough up dosh to ensure their homeland survived too.

[McAz]

This is descending into Mousetrap proportions of bollox. The world is full of politically loaded and funded scholars ready to spout one way or other on all things Jewish - especially since the creation of Israel. Given that the Bible is the main source re the United Kingdom we may as well argues about in which order Yahweh made the flowers.