Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    If someone invades your house then offers to let you sleep in the shed, you're perfectly entitled to tell them to get bent.
    didnt the arabs invade jerusalem and levant previously and tell the jews and christians to live in their shed? dont really see point you trying to make here
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    If someone invades your house then offers to let you sleep in the shed, you're perfectly entitled to tell them to get bent.
    If someone invades your house (the Arab states invading Israel in 1948) and says, "We're not going to stop until we've driven you into the sea, until you're all dead our exiled from the Levant", you're entitled to say, "Go **** yourself"
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by filthy_pup)
    If someone invades your house (the Arab states invading Israel in 1948) and says, "We're not going to stop until we've driven you into the sea, until you're all dead our exiled from the Levant", you're entitled to say, "Go **** yourself"
    Lol, not sure what history book this guy is reading, but it certainly isn't factual.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pinzgauer)
    Vile, isn't it? how the left have come to support this?




    Its a rather odd trend, not sure how it came about.

    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    This conflict is about far, far more than religion and Islamism.
    I didn't say it was. Just commented on the teaming up of left wingers and Islamists.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    By the way, I don't buy all these arguments about the settlement, saying that the West Bank must be ethnically cleansed of Jews before the Palestinians will even deign to accept sovereignty.

    Israel should just annex the West Bank and give Israeli citizenship to all the Arabs there. They will have a far better life under Israeli democracy than under their kleptocratic leaders
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Meenglishnogood)
    didnt the arabs invade jerusalem and levant previously and tell the jews and christians to live in their shed? dont really see point you trying to make here
    You mean after zionists had already tried to claim other peoples land as their own?

    (Original post by Meenglishnogood)
    again no, thats a simplistic explanation. everyone always had a place to live. the issue is and always has been that islamists control all the politics in (pretty much every islamic country) and they decided long time ago, jews should not be in control of their own land their. israels policy in the region is all to do with islamists agenda, be it airstrikes on islamsits attacks from hamas, from hezbollah, or even jsut trying to control islamsit activity in gaza or wb. their occupations in those regions have essentially been down to the fact that wheneevr they pull out and leave gazans/ WBers to ir, islamist groups and resources grow and grow again - and those regional governments /police forces cant be trusted to do anything about them

    in the same way we could not trust the taleban to do anything about alqueda in afganistan
    I'm talking about the creation of Israel, not post-Israeli politics.

    (Original post by Ggmu!)

    I didn't say it was. Just commented on the teaming up of left wingers and Islamists.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    People support the Palestinian cause, not Islamism or terrorist tactics.

    (Original post by filthy_pup)
    If someone invades your house (the Arab states invading Israel in 1948) and says, "We're not going to stop until we've driven you into the sea, until you're all dead our exiled from the Levant", you're entitled to say, "Go **** yourself"
    If you break into someones house and claim it for your own, is it your house?
    • TSR Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Agapelove)
    Western culture has brought many technological advancements, including the computer, Internet, airplanes, telephones, cars, and so on. It is interesting how some people wish to accept Western technology but do not wish to accept the Western ideas of freedom and democracy.
    Well advancements should be achieved without the influence of politics. As for the concept of freedom and democracy, they are not the same thing, democracy itself is a flawed concept as it cannot represent the views of every citizen in the country or even worse it cannot represent the majority of voters.

    People losing faith in God is not Western culture's fault. It is each person's responsibility to freely decide whether to believe in and seek God or not. Jesus, by the way, prophesied the following:
    (I boldened some in all the quotes in my reply.)

    'Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other,and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.' - Matthew 24:9-14 (NIV)

    So, it is no surprise that many people lose faith in God. That was bound to happen.


    Many Americans protest the USA attacking other countries, including me.
    And you should continue to do so:yep: as every politician should be held accountable for their actions.

    Good points.

    Arabs already have many states: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, U.A.E., Yemen, Qatar, Morocco, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Oman, and so on. Many of these states/areas were conquered by Muslim Arabs long time ago. Why then do they not allow the Jewish people their one Jewish state? I personally think that is very unfair of the Arab people.
    This is a red herring, at the time those countries were conquered the world was far different and political influence was restricted, and where there were no international watchdogs/governing bodies to the extent that we have now. Empires fighting was a common spectacle.
    The number of Arab countries should not influence your view on the current predicament, the rights of Palestinians and Israelis is the issue, and the use of "conquered" should not be used here. As both state that they wish to live in peace. However, the continued oppression of the Palestinians through economic sanctions and controlled borders cannot continue, it is illogical to think that people will accept oppression without fighting back, as in cases where daily food intake is limited, the waters that border your country are governed by a foreign nation, and where land your family has owned for generations is stolen and handed over to an immigrant that claims the land on the basis that his ancestors may have lived there. Jews and Arabs have lived alongside eachother for centuries without any qualms, however the opposition to the state of Israel is not an opposition to a Jewish homeland or for Jews to live in the region, rather it is an opposition to the inhumane treatment of Palestinian people by the Zionist Israelis. Not all Jews are Zionists, nor are all Zionists Jews.

    It's possible that the concept of jihad is why they feel the 'whole world' (or many people around the world who are not Muslim) is against them.
    This has nothing to do with the concept of Jihad, which is largely a personal struggle in the path to God. The current predicament is not a religious conflict, rather it is a conflict of politics. The feeling of isolation is an effect from the silence of Western governments. When Obama chooses to veto economic sanctions on Israel, the same sanctions that they would place on Russia, Iran, or Iraq, as well as remaining silent on the atrocious treatment of Palestinians, then it helps the Palestinians feel isolated. When the US chooses to claim it is a peace endorsing nation, yet continues to sell nuclear armaments and munition to Israel which are in turn killing civilians, then it promoting a notion of solidarity with Israel and distancing itself from the Palestinians.

    Did you know for a time, the former Soviet Union did not allow the people of Belarus to even speak their native tongue? Like the West and countries in the Middle East, Russia has her own issues. My friends from Belarus have told me of some grave injustices Russia had done to Belarus.
    Could you please provide a link concerning Israel wanting to take over Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and so on? Thanks.
    It is evident from Israels brief history that it have pursued to push borders into neighbouring countries. Though more importantly it continues to ignore the internationally recognised borders of Palestine, which it must adhere to if it wants to ultimately live in peace within the region.

    It is sad that your family has not been allowed to visit the al-Aqsa mosque frequently. It is also sad that the Jewish people have not been allowed to rebuild their temple. Both the Arab and Jewish sides of the conflict are very sad. I am glad you are not for forbidding Jewish people from living in the land where their forefathers once lived. That is good news.

    It would be awesome if both Arab and Jewish people could live in peace and that Arab Muslims could freely go to the al-Aqsa mosque and Jewish people could freely rebuild and go to their temple. Now, I understand there's a problem in that it's possible the Temple is supposed to be rebuilt where the Dome of the Rock stands. However, I wonder if it's possible for them to rebuild it in another place in Jerusalem? That would be cool to study.

    Some Christians believe that Jesus will return to the rebuilt temple, due to what Jesus said:
    (I boldened some.)

    'So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.' (Matthew 24:15-16 NIV)

    In order for people to see standing in the holy place the abomination that Jesus talks about, the holy place (which is considered to be in the temple) assumedly needs to be rebuilt.

    Some Christians, including me, believe Ezekiel 37 is about Jesus returning! God taking the children of Israel 'from among the heathen' and bringing the children of Israel 'into their own land' predates Jesus' return:
    (I boldened some.)

    '37:21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land: 37:22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all.
    37:23 Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.
    37:24 And David my servant shall be king over them;
    and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.
    37:25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.
    37:26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
    37:27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

    37:28 And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore. '
    https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...Ezekiel37.html
    The Jews have lived there for many centuries and have lived peacefully with their Arab neighbours, The Arabs have welcomed them as evident from history, where the Jews flourished in Spain, Portugal, as well as Jerusalem under Muslim rule.

    I am not a Muslim because I believe Muhammad is one of the false prophets Jesus prophesied would come (Matthew 24:11; 24:24). Muhammad disobeyed Jesus' commands to love one's enemies (Matthew 5:44; Luke 6:27-37), much like the Crusaders later disobeyed Jesus' commands to love one's enemies.
    Something I just learned is that the British empire killed more than 2,000 Arab people during the Arab uprising in Palestine against the British. That is sad. I wish everyone, including the English, the Arabs and the Jewish and Americans and so on were peaceful and didn't kill each other.

    Please see from 19:00 of this youtube:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy3aDIatrY0

    All of the youtube is insightful.

    How so? Did King David not conquer Jerusalem from the Jebusites and did King David not kill many Philistines? Palestine is the Romanized version of Philistine.



    Sadly, many Orthodox Jewish people do not accept Yeshua (Jesus) as the Messiah. So, while they disapprove of the creation of Israel, they also disapprove of Jesus Christ and do not accept him as the Messiah. Of course they are free to reject Jesus Christ as the Messiah, same as they are free to oppose Israel.
    The problem that Orthodox Jews have is that the state of Israel is not just using their faith but rather is using the martyrdom of Jews during the last century to justify the creation of the state of Israel at the expense of Palestinians.




    I put the rest in a spoiler, so I don't spam the thread with religious discussion as it may cause the thread to deviate from the topic.

    Spoiler:
    Show

    Was his Jewish wife not a part of the booty, the slaves of the Jewish women and children whose men were killed by Muhammad's followers? The following hadith is very sad:
    (I boldened some.)

    Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz:

    Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, 'Allahu Akbar! Khalbar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, 'Muhammad (has come).' (Some of our companions added, "With his army.") We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her." Thabit asked Anas, "O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?" He said, "Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her." Anas added, "While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet . So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, 'Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.' He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-SawTq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walrma (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Apostle ."
    http://sacred-texts.com/isl/bukhari/bh1/bh1_367.htm

    I wonder if Muhammad would have manumitted this poor 17 year old girl who had lost her father to death by the hand of Muslims, as well as her former husband, if she had not converted to the religion of the killers of the men of her tribe and decided to marry Muhammad? It appears that Muhammad did not manumit any other poor slave girl who was given to other people, like to this Dihya, who Muhammad told to 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.'

    The Qur'an has no problem with Muslims taking captives/slaves, people that their 'right hand possesses' and marrying them.

    '4:3 (Y. Ali) If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. '

    '4:24 (Y. Ali) Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property,- desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise. '

    24:31 (Y. Ali) And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss.

    While the Qur'an does advocate freeing slaves as consequences for the owner's bad behavior, isn't it best to simply not enslave people in the first place???

    '4:92 (Y. Ali) Never should a believer kill a believer; but (If it so happens) by mistake, (Compensation is due): If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing slave, and pay compensation to the deceased's family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and he was a believer, the freeing of a believing slave (Is enough). If he belonged to a people with whom ye have treaty of Mutual alliance, compensation should be paid to his family, and a believing slave be freed. For those who find this beyond their means, (is prescribed) a fast for two months running: by way of repentance to Allah. for Allah hath all knowledge and all wisdom.'

    '5:89 (Y. Ali) Allah will not call you to account for what is futile in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His signs, that ye may be grateful. '

    Again, isn't it better not to possess people with one's right hand (enslave them/make them captives) in the first place???
    Slavery existed before the advent of Islam, it only preferred to add more responsibility to the slave owner and give more rights to the slave:

    [/youtube]v=hGy4Osb_Pt8[/youtube]

    The following verse from the Qur'an makes it seem that the jizya is punishment for not accepting Islam:

    '9:29 (Y. Ali) Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
    9:30 (Y. Ali) The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
    '
    The Jizya tax was levied only on non-Muslims living in the Muslims lands, as such there were many exemptions - Women, children, monks/priests were exempt, as well as those who were considered too old. As for those who did pay the tax, they were also exempt from joining the army, and were free to live in the land in exchange for security by the Muslim army.

    I know that most Muslims are taught that Jews and Christians corrupted their Scriptures. However, I personally think that is an insult to God, since God does not allow His Scripture to be corrupted.


    I trust God to have protected the Truth in the Jewish and Christian Scriptures. Christians believe that the Jewish Scriptures are not corrupted, which is why the Old Testament is a part of the Christian Bible. We do not accuse God of allowing His Word to be corrupted.
    Muslims do not need to claim that the OT/NT has been corrupted or changed many times, The claim of apocryphal statements is expounded in the bible itself, and said to be serious mistakes, with backing of many denominations to either change the verse or remove it completely. For example, the only place where the Trinity was incontrovertibly mentioned was 1 John 5:7 - 'For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.' - was removed by Church leaders themselves.

    Furthermore there are two versions of the Bible, one is the version of the Catholics which includes the 7 books considered Apocrypha by Protestants, and subsequently removed in their version of the Bible.

    The Muslims didn't remove the verses or tell Christians that they should be considered apocryphal, Christians did so themselves.

    Muhammad wishing Allah's curse on Jews and Christians seems hateful to me. However, Jesus Christ tells his followers (and obviously Muhammad did not follow Jesus Christ like the Crusaders later on in history didn't truly follow Jesus Christ either) to bless those who curse:

    'But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.'
    Luke 6:27-28 (NIV)

    As you know, muslims believe in both Christianity and Judaism, but we believed that the books have been changed and the teachings perverted.
    Again, I believe it is an insult to God, since God protects the Scriptures He gave to the Jews and to Christians (the earliest Christians being Jews, including the apostles who walked and talked with Yeshua/Jesus and taught other people about him).

    [/quote]

    Do you support the idea of having one Jewish state in the world, which is in the land of their forefathers according to Ezekiel 37?



    Why does the idea of a Jewish state scare Arab people so much and/or fill them with hatred?
    A Jewish state does not scare them, they oppose a modern-Zionist state that cannot give fair treatment to Palestinians. As it also constantly allies itself with those same nations that have invaded countries in the region during recent times.


    True. It is actually a blessing to Muslims and Islam that Mecca and Medina are not holy to Judaism or Christianity.

    As a Gentile Christian, I personally think both Christianity and Islam should give Jerusalem back to Judaism. I do not believe Muhammad truly flew on a winged steed from Arabia to Jerusalem.

    While as a Christian, I of course would love to walk where Jesus Christ walked, I don't think Christians should control Jerusalem or prevent the Jewish people from rebuilding the temple. Freedom of religion includes Judaism and Judaism's holy city Jerusalem, in my opinion.

    Thanks so much for your kindness, courtesy and professionalism in your discussion with me. I appreciate it and thank you so much for your time. Blessings and salam/shalom/peace

    May God have mercy on both the Arabs and Jewish people in the land and may they both grow in obeying Yeshua/Isa/Jesus' command to love their enemies (Matthew 5:44; Luke 6:27-37).
    I hope I don't seem brash in this reply salaam/shalom/peace:hat:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by broscience123)
    What thread/headline was this? I think I missed this

    Edit: Ah I think you mean the topic proving Hamas were not responsible for kidnapping the teens.
    yea the breaking news, that a intelligence official says Hamas was not responsible. That is a news story a current event not part of the longer academic historical and political debate between the rights and wrongs of palestine and isreali history or different two state solutions
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pinzgauer)
    Vile, isn't it? how the left have come to support this?




    Trying to compare some guys in uniform doing a salute to Nazis? I am very offended by your statement. Do you know that over 6 million people died from that crimes committed by Nazis yet you attempt to trivialise that fact for your own emotional propaganda? Disgusting.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    If you break into someones house and claim it for your own, is it your house?
    So you call the Jews living in the Levant, many of whom had lived there since the year dot (and longer than the Arabs), are "breaking into someone's house"? You're saying the Levant has to be ethnically cleansed of Jews?

    Under UN Resolution 181, Israel has a categorical right to exist, no matter what anti-semites and neo-Nazis and their fellow travellers say. There was no pre-exising Palestinian state, and the international community had every right to partition it in that way.

    There wasn't even such a thing as the "Palestinian people" pre-1960s, they were called "Arabs", which is what they are
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by filthy_pup)
    So you call the Jews living in the Levant, many of whom had lived there since the year dot (and longer than the Arabs), are "breaking into someone's house"? You're saying the Levant has to be ethnically cleansed of Jews?

    Under UN Resolution 181, Israel has a categorical right to exist, no matter what anti-semites and neo-Nazis and their fellow travellers say. There was no pre-exising Palestinian state, and the international community had every right to partition it in that way.

    There wasn't even such a thing as the "Palestinian people" pre-1960s, they were called "Arabs", which is what they are
    Another deluded comment. Totally forgetting the mass immigration of Jews to Occupied Palestine and disregarding the fact that most of the ancestors of "Israelis" are from Europe. I guess after you keep telling yourself lies, you will eventually believe it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by getfunky!)
    The Arabs have welcomed them as evident from history, where the Jews flourished in Spain, Portugal, as well as Jerusalem under Muslim rule.
    Why should Jews have to live under "Muslim rule"? And yet Muslims are totally opposed to living under "Jewish rule"? Is this one of those double-standard thingys?

    The problem that Orthodox Jews have is that the state of Israel is not just using their faith but rather is using the martyrdom of Jews during the last century to justify the creation of the state of Israel at the expense of Palestinians.
    Err, no. The State of Israel is justified by UN Resolution 181. Show me where in Israel's founding documents they used Orthodox Judaism to justify its existence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by broscience123)
    Another deluded comment. Totally forgetting the mass immigration of Jews to [Mandatory Palestine]
    So you're against immigration? In that case what are you doing in this country?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by filthy_pup)
    So you're against immigration? In that case what are you doing in this country?
    What has that even got to do with anything?
    You said Jews have always been in Occupied Palestine.
    I replied saying that there was a mass immigration of Jews to Occupied Palestine.
    You replied with an unrelated and personal attack.

    *Yawn* These hasbara posts are getting worse and worse each day.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by getfunky!)
    However, the continued oppression of the Palestinians through economic sanctions and controlled borders cannot continue, it is illogical to think that people will accept oppression without fighting back
    They can fight back all they want, it is entirely clear that their "fighting" is completely ineffectual, and done basically out of stubborn pride and a desire to save "face".

    When the Palestinians care about their children more than they care about "face", maybe we will get somewhere. In the meantime, Israel is absolutely entitled defend itself, particularly given the Palestinian Arabs have repeatedly rejected peace deals.

    opposition to the state of Israel is not an opposition to a Jewish homeland or for Jews to live in the region, rather it is an opposition to the inhumane treatment of Palestinian people by the Zionist Israelis. Not all Jews are Zionists, nor are all Zionists Jews.
    What on earth are you talking about? You people are opposed to the State of Israel = opposed to a Jewish homeland. Or are you saying, "Anywhere but here?".

    This is called rejectionist's remorse. The Arabs rejected the State of Israel in 1948 and tried to wipe it out with violence. They lost. You don't get to resort to violence, and then complain about the outcome.

    which it must adhere to if it wants to ultimately live in peace within the region.
    :lol: You're lecturing Israel about what it must or must not do if it wants to live in peace? Mate, Israel has had peace with Jordan, Egypt and Syria for decades. They're not coming to "rescue" the Palestinians, they're on their own and they better get used to it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by broscience123)
    What has that even got to do with anything?
    What it's got to do with it is you're a hypocrite

    *Yawn* These hasbara posts are getting worse and worse each day.
    :yawn: Every time you guys are losing an argument, you whine "hasbara" as if it's supposed to be impressive or something. It just makes you look like a crybaby. You guys seem to think "hasbara" is some kind of Israeli secret service :lol:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by filthy_pup)
    What it's got to do with it is you're a hypocrite



    :yawn: Every time you guys are losing an argument, you whine "hasbara" as if it's supposed to be impressive or something. It just makes you look like a crybaby. You guys seem to think "hasbara" is some kind of Israeli secret service :lol:
    How does me disproving your made up "facts" make me a hypocrite?
    And congratulations, another classic hasbara tactic:

    Step 1) Make a false claim
    Step 2) Get the false claim disproven
    Step 3) ABORT ABORT!! CHANGE THE SUBJECT!!!11!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by broscience123)
    And congratulations, another classic hasbara tactic
    Mate, you don't even know what hasbara is.

    By the way, you're going back on ignore, the other guy was right; you are an absolute troll.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TSR Mustafa)
    Hamas is hiding behind it's citizens , but that doesn't justify slaughtering them.
    "Those who do nothing about sin and evil, help the sin and evil to prevail."
    Frankly, they are guilty of standing about and being cowards. Sure, don't get me wrong that they are in a ****ing dire position, but they have the choice of either be killed by fighting Hamas and maybe wining, or getting killed by Israel. One has the possibility of a better future, one does not.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by filthy_pup)
    Mate, you don't even know what hasbara is.

    By the way, you're going back on ignore, the other guy was right; you are an absolute troll.
    Step 4) Realise that the guy who you were arguing is right
    Step 5) Put him on ignore "WAAH HES RIGHT! I DONT WANNA HEAR THE TRUTH! CLOSE MY EARSSS!!!"
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 8, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.