Israel's Netanyahu says plans to annex settlements in West Bank if reelected

[symiotic]

31 minutes ago, notmyself said:

 

Plenty of atheist Jews but the power is held by the geriatric extreme right wing old guard. Same in most of the middle east.

 

 
athiest jews from Europe, you mean non-religious Europeans in Palestine?  Do people want to learn something, I know it's a big ask in todays climate to proposition that someone might not know everything, might be willing to overlook their ego once, and might have an attention span longer than a Vine video, but... if you do...

...this image will help you understand how the jewish theology/ philosophy turned into Zionist racism, it is based on the range of fossilised remains of the (terminology you might also find creeping into thailand) 'Big Cranium Club' aka Neanderthals, from Israel to London (and by extension via Western migration to USA).  You notice how all politicians start to resemble big-headed thugs?  Neanderthal is from Neander Valley from Joachim Neander whose surname is derived from Neumann literally 'new man.'  This is why the racism arises from them making a distinction between homo sapiens and homo neaderthalensis (new man), there isn't, but like them no longer being unified by Jewish theology aka God Club, they haven't outgrown this next fantasy yet either...

Edited April 8, 2019 by symiotic

[notmyself]

4 minutes ago, symiotic said:

 
athiest jews from Europe, you mean non-religious Europeans in Palestine?

 

What I mean is people who identify themselves as Jewish but are non theistic. Many people who identify as Muslim are also the same.

[symiotic]

17 minutes ago, notmyself said:

 

What I mean is people who identify themselves as Jewish but are non theistic. Many people who identify as Muslim are also the same.

 
This is classic right.  You have Revolutionaries (literally meaning going around in circles) running the political systems worldwide, but erasing much of the violent past (or who started it) and focussing post-WW2.  Then you have actually history entirely relevant to this THIS time in history: the Religious Wars that began in 1517 and largely ended with the 'Peace of Westphalia' in 1648,  that determined SOVEREIGNTY HAS TO SUPERSEDE RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION FOR THERE TO BE PEACE.  And now 2019 and we're back to calling people Athiestic Jews & Muslims & Arabs etc...  you played yourself revolutionaries...  Athiestic Jews, from 'Europe'... <deleted> not even Europe is a <deleted> actual Sovereign country...  16th and 17th Century Bloodshed for nearly 150 years and we still can't stick English, French German, Palestine, Isreal (now the jewish state ... ... !?!). 

Edited April 8, 2019 by symiotic

[notmyself]

17 minutes ago, symiotic said:

 
This is classic right.  You have Revolutionaries (literally meaning going around in circles) running the political systems worldwide, but erasing much of the violent past (or who started it) and focussing post-WW2.  Then you have actually history entirely relevant to this THIS time in history: the Religious Wars that began in 1517 and largely ended with the 'Peace of Westphalia' in 1648,  that determined SOVEREIGNTY HAS TO SUPERSEDE RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION FOR THERE TO BE PEACE.  And now 2019 and we're back to calling people Athiestic Jews & Muslims & Arabs etc...  you played yourself revolutionaries...  Athiestic Jews, from 'Europe'... <deleted> not even Europe is a <deleted> actual Sovereign country...  16th and 17th Century Bloodshed for nearly 150 years and we still can't stick English, French German, Palestine, Isreal (now the jewish state ... ... !?!). 

 

Tribalism.

 

This land is mine:
 

 

 

[Prissana Pescud]

1 hour ago, notmyself said:

 

The same is true of many and especially Iran who have a huge young and well educated population. 

Yes it is sad.

And supported by most western countries. 

 I don't know why.

 

 

Israel have never tried to make peace with Arabia

 

I believe we should let them alone.

save big buckets of money.

 Let them kill each other

[notmyself]

3 minutes ago, Prissana Pescud said:

Yes it is sad.

And supported by most western countries. 

 I don't know why.

 

 

Israel have never tried to make peace with Arabia

 

I believe we should let them alone.

save big buckets of money.

 Let them kill each other

 

I'll happily answer the first at a later date.

 

Let them alone..... It might be more politically correct to suggest that they should stand on their own two feet but essentially it's the same. It is the case that many if not all of these theistic beliefs instil a sense of being given rather than being earned which further instils a sense of willing serfdom or as some say, cowardice. The settlements are on occupied land which illegal... Israel disputed this so how about we take to a tribunal? Nope... the U.S. will not allow that to happen because Israel would lose the argument. Answering the first question without delay.... It's the Christian vote and the Evangelical vote (U.S.) that poisons any rational discourse. If it were just about land then it would have been resolved decades ago but the parties of god have a veto on it. Forget friendships between peoples, tribes etc. Forget living, loving and learning and let the cult of death take over. Banish any non Jews from the promised land while getting as many Jews into it should bring about the messiah pleasing Judaism and Christianity.

Believe what you will. Believe you are a chicken sandwich for all care but don't expect any respect unless it is earned. Take the 400,000 settlers out of the occupied land could solve it straight off of the bat but nooooo. Member JT said the two state solution is on the line if Bibi is re-elected. Oh really. Has the opposition stated that they will remove the illegal settlers? Hogwash. It has the dreadful stench of NRA, anti-vax, climate change, flat Earth proponents. 

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, notmyself said:

 

I'll happily answer the first at a later date.

 

Let them alone..... It might be more politically correct to suggest that they should stand on their own two feet but essentially it's the same. It is the case that many if not all of these theistic beliefs instil a sense of being given rather than being earned which further instils a sense of willing serfdom or as some say, cowardice. The settlements are on occupied land which illegal... Israel disputed this so how about we take to a tribunal? Nope... the U.S. will not allow that to happen because Israel would lose the argument. Answering the first question without delay.... It's the Christian vote and the Evangelical vote (U.S.) that poisons any rational discourse. If it were just about land then it would have been resolved decades ago but the parties of god have a veto on it. Forget friendships between peoples, tribes etc. Forget living, loving and learning and let the cult of death take over. Banish any non Jews from the promised land while getting as many Jews into it should bring about the messiah pleasing Judaism and Christianity.

Believe what you will. Believe you are a chicken sandwich for all care but don't expect any respect unless it is earned. Take the 400,000 settlers out of the occupied land could solve it straight off of the bat but nooooo. Member JT said the two state solution is on the line if Bibi is re-elected. Oh really. Has the opposition stated that they will remove the illegal settlers? Hogwash. It has the dreadful stench of NRA, anti-vax, climate change, flat Earth proponents. 

 

 

 

That post is all over the place but since you referred to me, I will reply to that. The point about the election being decisive about the two state solution is that if Bibi wins, he has promised to officially annex the current west bank settlements. If he does that, any hope (which of course has been very dim for along time) of a negotiated two state solution probably would be totally finished. I agree of course that the west bank settlements are illegal but I think in a potential negotiated peace deal some of the settlements close to Jerusalem could be retained by Israel and Israel would never agree to anything that wouldn't involve ironclad security guarantees and protections that no doubt would diminish any purist Palestinian state independence but arguably better than nothing. I would argue that it would be. 

As far as the opposition to Bibi, no there is no policy position to abandon the current settlements but there isn't a promise to annex them either.

Surely you get the difference?
Bibi if he wins and fulfills his promise -- two state solution game over.

Opposition -- still a faint hope.

Again, faint hope better than no hope, eh? 

[bristolboy]

14 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That post is all over the place but since you referred to me, I will reply to that. The point about the election being decisive about the two state solution is that if Bibi wins, he has promised to officially annex the current west bank settlements. If he does that, any hope (which of course has been very dim for along time) of a negotiated two state solution probably would be totally finished. I agree of course that the west bank settlements are illegal but I think in a potential negotiated peace deal some of the settlements close to Jerusalem could be retained by Israel and Israel would never agree to anything that wouldn't involve ironclad security guarantees and protections that no doubt would diminish any purist Palestinian state independence but arguably better than nothing. I would argue that it would be. 

As far as the opposition to Bibi, no there is no policy position to abandon the current settlements but there isn't a promise to annex them either.

Surely you get the difference?
Bibi if he wins and fulfills his promise -- two state solution game over.

Opposition -- still a faint hope.

Again, faint hope better than no hope, eh? 

Actually, at this juncture it's virtually a distinction without a difference. How will the lives of Palestinians on the West Bank change if Israel annexes the settlement? How will the lives of the colonizers change?

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Actually, at this juncture it's virtually a distinction without a difference. How will the lives of Palestinians on the West Bank change if Israel annexes the settlement? How will the lives of the colonizers change?

I can't answer that but I imagine the settlement residents will be feeling even more cocky. It's a complex issue. I can see how some people that are hostile to the existence of Israel might even be cheering on ending the last hope of a two state solution. Then they can call Israel an apartheid regime with more legitimacy.

[Prissana Pescud]

4 hours ago, notmyself said:

 

I'll happily answer the first at a later date.

 

Let them alone..... It might be more politically correct to suggest that they should stand on their own two feet but essentially it's the same. It is the case that many if not all of these theistic beliefs instil a sense of being given rather than being earned which further instils a sense of willing serfdom or as some say, cowardice. The settlements are on occupied land which illegal... Israel disputed this so how about we take to a tribunal? Nope... the U.S. will not allow that to happen because Israel would lose the argument. Answering the first question without delay.... It's the Christian vote and the Evangelical vote (U.S.) that poisons any rational discourse. If it were just about land then it would have been resolved decades ago but the parties of god have a veto on it. Forget friendships between peoples, tribes etc. Forget living, loving and learning and let the cult of death take over. Banish any non Jews from the promised land while getting as many Jews into it should bring about the messiah pleasing Judaism and Christianity.

Believe what you will. Believe you are a chicken sandwich for all care but don't expect any respect unless it is earned. Take the 400,000 settlers out of the occupied land could solve it straight off of the bat but nooooo. Member JT said the two state solution is on the line if Bibi is re-elected. Oh really. Has the opposition stated that they will remove the illegal settlers? Hogwash. It has the dreadful stench of NRA, anti-vax, climate change, flat Earth proponents. 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

I can't answer that but I imagine the settlement residents will be feeling even more cocky. It's a complex issue. I can see how some people that are hostile to the existence of Israel might even be cheering on ending the last hope of a two state solution. Then they can call Israel an apartheid regime with more legitimacy.

There is not one iota of difference whether Israel annexes parts of Palestine or Syria.

Everyone already understands that Israel is committing illegal acts with impunity.

All know the factual base for a state is a falsehood.

Israel was a committed apartheid state long before the 1948 vote to steal land and make Palestinian people homeless.

It is not a complex issue. You steal land from someone, evict them and then deny any wrong doing.

Then you steal more land and build houses on it. Then you annex more land, all at the point of a US weapon.

Then you attempt to justify it. This the democratic state of Israel no matter which bigot wins the vote

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, Prissana Pescud said:

 

There is not one iota of difference whether Israel annexes parts of Palestine or Syria.

Everyone already understands that Israel is committing illegal acts with impunity.

All know the factual base for a state is a falsehood.

Israel was a committed apartheid state long before the 1948 vote to steal land and make Palestinian people homeless.

It is not a complex issue. You steal land from someone, evict them and then deny any wrong doing.

Then you steal more land and build houses on it. Then you annex more land, all at the point of a US weapon.

Then you attempt to justify it. This the democratic state of Israel no matter which bigot wins the vote

Sounds like the rhetoric of someone that doesn't accept the right of Israel to exist at all, within any borders. 

Anyway, I agree the settlements are illegal.

I understand voting to not annex them won't really change much.

It would be the status quo for the settlements.

But I don't agree that this vote coming up doesn't matter.

There are levels of bad and keeping Bibi is a higher level of bad.

Obviously I'm much more supportive of the existence and defense of Israel than you are but if there is to ever be a peaceful two state solution, at least some of the settlements will need to be on the table. 

Calling Israel dirty names such as apartheid state is really neither here nor there.

It may make the name callers feel better is all. Obviously the Israeli voters don't care what the demonizers of their homeland call them. Their priorities are naturally similar to most states, economy, quality of life issues for their citizens and security. Twenty percent of the Israeli citizens are Arabs. Their votes count there too. 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

8 hours ago, symiotic said:

 
athiest jews from Europe, you mean non-religious Europeans in Palestine?  Do people want to learn something, I know it's a big ask in todays climate to proposition that someone might not know everything, might be willing to overlook their ego once, and might have an attention span longer than a Vine video, but... if you do...

...this image will help you understand how the jewish theology/ philosophy turned into Zionist racism, it is based on the range of fossilised remains of the (terminology you might also find creeping into thailand) 'Big Cranium Club' aka Neanderthals, from Israel to London (and by extension via Western migration to USA).  You notice how all politicians start to resemble big-headed thugs?  Neanderthal is from Neander Valley from Joachim Neander whose surname is derived from Neumann literally 'new man.'  This is why the racism arises from them making a distinction between homo sapiens and homo neaderthalensis (new man), there isn't, but like them no longer being unified by Jewish theology aka God Club, they haven't outgrown this next fantasy yet either...

Truly bizarre. 

What an odd map as well.

Would the member that posted it kindly provide a LINK as to where it comes from and what it's supposed to prove? It appears to me to be similar to the anti Zionist "Khazar" origin conspiracy theories popular with Jew haters both white supremacist and Islamist. Basically total B.S. hate speech. But seeing the link for the map may provide further light on the specific type of weirdness that has been posted above. 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Jingthing

[roobaa01]

well spoken bibi then kicking hamas faces, a palestinian state is not needed as it increases hamas  muslim terror breeding. necessary is the territory expansion of democracy for israel is the only middle east democacy in the midst of authoritarian muslim countries.

 

wbr

roobaa01

[Jingthing]

15 minutes ago, roobaa01 said:

well spoken bibi then kicking hamas faces, a palestinian state is not needed as it increases hamas  muslim terror breeding. necessary is the territory expansion of democracy for israel is the only middle east democacy in the midst of authoritarian muslim countries.

 

wbr

roobaa01

That kind of rhetoric ignores the reality of about 4.8 million Arab people living in both Gaza and he West Bank. So what? The status quo for them forever? That won't breed terrorism? Of course Israel did leave their settlements in Gaza long ago and that didn't bring peace any closer.

[candide]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Truly bizarre. 

What an odd map as well.

Would the member that posted it kindly provide a LINK as to where it comes from and what it's supposed to prove? It appears to me to be similar to the anti Zionist "Khazar" origin conspiracy theories popular with Jew haters both white supremacist and Islamist. Basically total B.S. hate speech. But seeing the link for the map may provide further light on the specific type of weirdness that has been posted above. 

Map of Neanderthal men's known settlements

[Prissana Pescud]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Sounds like the rhetoric of someone that doesn't accept the right of Israel to exist at all, within any borders. 

Anyway, I agree the settlements are illegal.

I understand voting to not annex them won't really change much.

It would be the status quo for the settlements.

But I don't agree that this vote coming up doesn't matter.

There are levels of bad and keeping Bibi is a higher level of bad.

Obviously I'm much more supportive of the existence and defense of Israel than you are but if there is to ever be a peaceful two state solution, at least some of the settlements will need to be on the table. 

Calling Israel dirty names such as apartheid state is really neither here nor there.

It may make the name callers feel better is all. Obviously the Israeli voters don't care what the demonizers of their homeland call them. Their priorities are naturally similar to most states, economy, quality of life issues for their citizens and security. Twenty percent of the Israeli citizens are Arabs. Their votes count there too. 

It is you that raised the issue of being apartheid.

 Don't bluster. As for defending Israel, I would stand by you to protect The Original Sanctioned Border 1948. 

 You are trying to defend a country that mimics a country they were once persecuted in....Egypt of course.

[Prissana Pescud]

2 minutes ago, Prissana Pescud said:

It is you that raised the issue of being apartheid.

 Don't bluster. As for defending Israel, I would stand by you to protect The Original Sanctioned Border 1948. 

 You are trying to defend a country that mimics a country they were once persecuted in....Egypt of course.

If Israel did not evict so many Palestinians when the powers that were powers created a new state,

the percentage would possibly be 60/40 in the Palestinians favour. 

[Jingthing]

33 minutes ago, candide said:

Map of Neanderthal men's known settlements

Aha. That makes some sense. But what's with the bizarre connection of Neanderthals to Jews? 

 

OK, here is a clue.

Like I said I detected a connection in his bizarre rant to the DEBUNKED Khazarian Jewish conversion theory for European Jews. 

This (dated) article links the Khazar thing to Neanderthals.

So it seems he posted a flavor of that sort of thing that I just haven't seen before.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/1997/08/so-are-the-neanderthals-still-jews.html

 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

9 minutes ago, Prissana Pescud said:

It is you that raised the issue of being apartheid.

 Don't bluster. As for defending Israel, I would stand by you to protect The Original Sanctioned Border 1948. 

 You are trying to defend a country that mimics a country they were once persecuted in....Egypt of course.

 

I was replying to YOUR post that said --

 

Quote

Israel was a committed apartheid state long before the 1948 vote to steal land and make Palestinian people homeless.

 

If Israel backed up to 1948 borders they couldn't exist. So I take that demand as snarky code of not really supporting the right of Israel to exist. Now the 1948 borders might have been fine IF most of the Arab world hadn't immediately invaded 1948 Israel explicitly trying to wipe them off the map. Miraculously, Israel beat those aggressors. But if that works for you, advocating for borders that you know full well Israel could NEVER agree to now and could never continue to exit with such borders, enjoy that position. Back in the real world, holding to a demand like that is a waste of time for anyone at all serious about seeking a peaceful solution. 

[candide]

14 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Aha. That makes some sense. But what's with the bizarre connection of Neanderthals to Jews? 

It's not clear for me either. I don't know of any bar mitzvah ever occurred in the Altai mountains. ????

[Jingthing]

7 minutes ago, candide said:

It's not clear for me either. I don't know of any bar mitzvah ever occurred in the Altai mountains. ????

The Khazar conversion thing which has a ring of truth because it has enjoyed some serious objective academic research even by Jews is a huge thing with Jew haters. The line is that the Jews in Israel are not actually ethnically Jews. Instead they are Khazars. So the theory goes that Jews no ancestral connection to being indigenous people of Israel. Thus Israel shouldn't exist because if you buy the Khazar theory, the Zionist ideology which includes a connection of the Jewish people to Israel is a fraud. They ignore a lot of things with that kind of B.S. First of all the Khazar theory has been debunked. Then there is strong evidence that the masses of Jews that used to live in Eastern Europe before the Nazis occurred because of migration of Jews from Western Europe into Eastern Europe, not Khazars. Then there is the fact the majority of the Jewish population in Israel has Middle Eastern origins, not European ones. Then there is the fact that Jews are both a religion and also a people (ethnicities associated with Jews). A classic ethnoreligious group. So the real and totally historically valid connection of Jews to Israel is not limited to ethnicity or race. 

That Khazar stuff is old hat. It often turns up in any online discussion of Israel. But the Neanderthal connection was new to me. 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Jingthing

[candide]

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

The Khazar conversion thing which has a ring of truth because it has enjoyed some serious objective academic research even by Jews is a huge thing with Jew haters. The line is that the Jews in Israel are not actually ethnically Jews. Instead they are Khazars. So the theory goes that Jews no ancestral connection to being indigenous people of Israel. Thus Israel shouldn't exist because if you buy the Khazar theory, the Zionist ideology which includes a connection of the Jewish people to Israel is a fraud. They ignore a lot of things with that kind of B.S. First of all the Khazar theory has been debunked. Then there is strong evidence that the masses of Jews that used to live in Eastern Europe before the Nazis occurred because of migration of Jews from Western Europe into Eastern Europe, not Khazars. Then there is the fact the majority of the Jewish population in Israel has Middle Eastern origins, not European ones. Then there is the fact that Jews are both a religion and also a people (ethnicities associated with Jews). A classic ethnoreligious group. So the real and totally historically valid connection of Jews to Israel is not limited to ethnicity or race. 

That Khazar stuff is old hat. It often turns up in any online discussion of Israel. But the Neanderthal connection was new to me. 

I know about it. But the Khazars were very far from the Altai mountain.

[Jingthing]

Just now, candide said:

I know about it. But the Khazars were very far from the Altai mountain.

In any case even if the Khazar conversion theory was actually correct, which now it appears that it is not, would not be a definitive reason to state that the state of Israel should not exist. There is a theme here. So many people not focusing on current issues at hand as they would for any other nation, but rather obsessed with arguing Israel shouldn't have existed in the first place and thus should stop existing now. What other country gets that treatment? 

[stevenl]

37 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

In any case even if the Khazar conversion theory was actually correct, which now it appears that it is not, would not be a definitive reason to state that the state of Israel should not exist. There is a theme here. So many people not focusing on current issues at hand as they would for any other nation, but rather obsessed with arguing Israel shouldn't have existed in the first place and thus should stop existing now. What other country gets that treatment? 

"So many people not focusing on current issues at hand as they would for any other nation, but rather obsessed with arguing Israel shouldn't have existed in the first place and thus should stop existing now."

No, that is not the argument I see here.

 

The argument I see here is that the foundations of Israel are shaky, and in stead of trying to stabilise the foundations Israel is is expanding.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

"So many people not focusing on current issues at hand as they would for any other nation, but rather obsessed with arguing Israel shouldn't have existed in the first place and thus should stop existing now."

No, that is not the argument I see here.

 

The argument I see here is that the foundations of Israel are shaky, and in stead of trying to stabilise the foundations Israel is is expanding.

So you didn't notice the Neanderthal rant? I figured out that was a variation of the anti-Zionist Khazarian theory agenda. 

I didn't say everyone here was arguing against the existence of Israel, but some are.

Also yes I also think anyone saying go back to the 1948 borders is ALSO arguing against the existence of Israel. 

I agree Israel should not annex the west bank and Bibi should lose, but there is an excellent chance both of things will happen. That is depressing. 

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

So you didn't notice the Neanderthal rant? I figured out that was a variation of the anti-Zionist Khazarian theory agenda. 

I didn't say everyone here was arguing against the existence of Israel, but some are.

Also yes I also think anyone saying go back to the 1948 borders is ALSO arguing against the existence of Israel. 

I agree Israel should not annex the west bank and Bibi should lose, but there is an excellent chance both of things will happen. That is depressing. 

I am not arguing on the basis of one post, I am arguing on the basis of the thread. 'some' is not the same as 'so many'.

[observer90210]

Hope the alleged highly corrupt Netanyahou is not re-elected as his annexing of extra land could be speculated as a motivation solely for monetary purpose with juicy commissions from the real estate builders ?

 

Kindly do not start the usual accusations of being anti-jew or the usual rubbish, as it is well known that the Israel Police is in deep probe towards the misconduct of Bibi and his mafia.

 

The former Israel chief of Staff Gantz seems a fine politial opponent and deserves a chance to take over.

[Jingthing]

Just now, stevenl said:

I am not arguing on the basis of one post, I am arguing on the basis of the thread. 'some' is not the same as 'so many'.

Splitting hairs. Move on.  

[Jingthing]

Just now, observer90210 said:

Hope the alleged highly corrupt Netanyahou is not re-elected as his annexing of extra land could be speculated as a motivation solely for monetary purpose with juicy commissions from the real estate builders ?

 

Kindly do not start the usual accusations of being anti-jew or the usual rubbish, as it is well known that the Israel Police is in deep probe towards the misconduct of Bibi and his mafia.

 

The former Israel chief of Staff Gantz seems a fine politial opponent and deserves a chance to take over.

Huh!?!

This is getting bizarre. You didn't say anything anti-Semitic so why the over defensiveness? 

I totally agree. Bibi should be defeated. He's clearly a criminal just like his good buddy in Washington. 

But he'll probably win anyway.

[stevenl]

14 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Splitting hairs. Move on.  

No.

 

I react to the thread, you react to one post. And then my reaction is 'splitting hairs'. You just have to accept that some people are able to see things in a broad perspective.