19 hours ago, billd766 said:

There has been fighting in the land of Palestine since the turn of the 20th century. Israelis have been killing Palestinians and stealing their land  for decades. Far far longer than this latest episode. And most of the Palestinians were, and still are, innocent people. There is guilt on both sides, but far more guilt on the Israeli and IDF side.

Palestine is not an actual country. If anything it has the old Jewish name which is different.

19 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Palestine is not an actual country. If anything it has the old Jewish name which is different.

Of course Palestine is an actual country. Israel only became a state in 1948 and was created by stealing land from the Palestinians and is still happening every day.

 

Israel is a figment of the imagination of people who believe that THEIR god gave them the land thousands of year ago. Not that anybody has ever seen this mysterious god, but believe that speaking to a hole in an old wall, and not getting a response is the same thing.

 

If you believe in 1 god then you should believe in ALL the gods across the world, going back long before the Romans.

 

Every race and religion believes that they alone have the one true god and that all other gods are false.

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

Of course Palestine is an actual country. Israel OTH is a figment of the imagination of people who believe that THEIR god gave them the land thousands of year ago. Not that anybody has ever seen this mysterious god.\, but believe that speaking to a hole in an old wall, and not getting a response is the same thing.

 

If you believe in 1 god then you should believe in ALL the gods across the world, going back long before the Romans.

 

Every race and religion believes that they alone have the one true god and that all other gods are false.

I suggest you read up on these things a little more. What you are saying is fundamentally wrong.

3 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

I suggest you read up on these things a little more. What you are saying is fundamentally wrong.

Says who?

5 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Why doesn't your Country take in the Palestinian children ?

Why isn't YOUR Country giving them asylum ?

 

Er, it says they are. And that has got this sicko in a tizz. Can't have brown children getting fixed up in our glorious British hospitals.

7 hours ago, billd766 said:

Because the border with Egypt is locked on the Israeli side.

It’s blocked now because the idiots in Gaza started another war with Israel.   

10 hours ago, Chris.C said:

Where are you getting this information?

 

In Lebanon, sectarian tensions and the fragile confessional system pre-dated the arrival of Palestinians. The Lebanese Civil War had multiple drivers: Maronite–Muslim divides, Cold War dynamics, Syrian intervention, and later Israeli invasion. To pin the war chiefly on Palestinians oversimplifies and distorts history.

 

In Jordan, the monarchy already faced internal opposition and identity struggles between East Bank Jordanians and the much larger Palestinian population. Black September was as much about King Hussein consolidating authority as it was about armed factions.

 

Palestinians in both Lebanon and Jordan were denied basic rights, often restricted from work, property ownership, or integration. In Lebanon especially, refugees were confined to camps under harsh conditions. It is unrealistic to expect a stateless, disenfranchised population to remain politically passive under those conditions – particularly while their homeland remained occupied.

 

Yes, armed factions created instability. But to present this as uniquely Palestinian ignores the fact that militancy has been a common response among oppressed peoples throughout history. Resistance movements in Ireland, Algeria, South Africa, and elsewhere were once branded as “destabilizing terrorists,” only later to be recognized as political actors. Singling out Palestinians as inherently destabilizing shifts blame away from the systemic denial of their rights.

 

Suggesting that Palestinians must either “eradicate Israel” or live under “Israeli oversight” is a false dichotomy. The international consensus for decades has been a two-state solution – Israel alongside a sovereign Palestine. Palestinians themselves have repeatedly accepted this framework (e.g., PLO recognition of Israel in 1993). It is Israeli settlement expansion and political obstruction that have eroded its viability, not simply Palestinian intransigence.

 

Highlighting Palestinian militancy without equal emphasis on Israeli invasions, massacres (Sabra and Shatila, 1982), and systematic denial of Palestinian self-determination creates a one-sided picture. It risks turning refugee survival strategies into proof of unworthiness, while ignoring the far greater asymmetry of power that forced them into exile in the first place.

 

Yes, Palestinians in Lebanon and Jordan were involved in armed conflict. But that was a symptom, not the cause, of their dispossession and statelessness. To use this history as an argument against Palestinian nationhood is like blaming the refugee for the fire that drove them from their home, while ignoring the arsonist who lit it.

 

 

Outstanding response providing additional perspective to my comments which in retrospect contained bias while I attempted to present the reality ignored by many that Palestinians are not wholly innocent in this mess.

 

Here is my response: 

 

Lebanon:

Agree: Sectarian tensions and the confessional system were indeed already fragile before the PLO’s arrival. The Maronite–Muslim divide, Cold War rivalries, Syrian involvement, and later the Israeli invasion all played major roles. To say the civil war was caused by Palestinians is an oversimplification.

Contradiction (slightly): While not the root cause, the militarisation of Palestinian factions and their autonomy in southern Lebanon did exacerbate pre-existing tensions and provided local actors with both a rallying point and a pretext for violence. So, they were a major accelerant, even if not the fundamental cause.

 

Jordan:

Agree: The monarchy faced deep East Bank–Palestinian tensions long before Black September. Hussein’s crackdown was as much about consolidating Hashemite rule as dealing with Palestinian armed groups.

Contradiction (partly): Palestinian armed factions in Jordan weren’t just passive victims – they did operate with a degree of impunity, at times directly challenging state authority (roadblocks, quasi-state behaviour). That certainly contributed to the escalation, even if Hussein used it to his advantage.

 

Palestinian Rights:

Agree: Palestinians in Lebanon and Jordan were denied rights, and the camp system in Lebanon was especially oppressive. Expecting them to remain apolitical under those conditions is indeed unrealistic.

Contradiction (nuance): Some host states’ restrictions were not only punitive but also deliberate attempts to avoid permanent settlement, in the belief this would undermine the Palestinian cause for return. While this doesn’t excuse the harshness, it means the motive was more complex than just discrimination.

 

Militancy and Resistance:

Agree: Armed resistance as a reaction to statelessness is a global pattern (Ireland, Algeria, South Africa etc.). To treat Palestinians as uniquely destabilising is ahistorical.

Contradiction (important caveat): Unlike some of those other struggles, Palestinian factions often operated outside their homeland (in Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait). This created a dynamic where they destabilised host countries, which understandably bred resentment.

 

False Dichotomy on Israel:

Agree: The “eradicate Israel or live under Israeli control” framing is indeed a false dichotomy. The two-state solution has long been the consensus, and the PLO did formally recognise Israel in 1993. Israeli settlement policy has possibly eroded viability as much as Palestinian rejectionism.

Contradiction (slight): Not all Palestinian factions accepted Oslo or the two-state framework – Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and others openly reject Israel’s existence. So while the PLO position is often cited, Palestinian politics have always been divided.

 

Highlighting Militancy vs Israeli Actions:

Agree: It is selective to spotlight Palestinian militancy while ignoring Sabra and Shatila, repeated Israeli invasions, and systemic denial of Palestinian rights. Power asymmetry matters here.

Contradiction (small qualification): Some Palestinian groups did deliberately target civilians (airline hijackings, school and bus attacks), which is not merely “survival strategy” but intentional terror tactics. That distinction matters when weighing historical narratives.

 

Causality and Blame:

Agree: Palestinian armed conflict in host states was a symptom of dispossession. Using this as proof against Palestinian statehood is indeed like blaming the refugee for the fire.

Contradiction (caveat): While dispossession explains militancy, it doesn’t absolve armed factions of agency. Their decisions had real and often disastrous consequences for host populations – so they can’t be painted only as victims of circumstance.

 

 

It is also important to recognise that perspectives on these events vary enormously, and each side tends to emphasise the facts that best fit its own narrative. In such a highly complex and emotive history, no single-page summary can capture the full reality. Every claim can be contested with further detail, context, or counterexamples, which is precisely why the debate over Palestinians, host states, and Israel remains so enduring and polarised.

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Outstanding response providing additional perspective to my comments which in retrospect contained bias while I attempted to present the reality ignored by many that Palestinians are not wholly innocent in this mess.

 

Here is my response: 

 

Lebanon:

Agree: Sectarian tensions and the confessional system were indeed already fragile before the PLO’s arrival. The Maronite–Muslim divide, Cold War rivalries, Syrian involvement, and later the Israeli invasion all played major roles. To say the civil war was caused by Palestinians is an oversimplification.

Contradiction (slightly): While not the root cause, the militarisation of Palestinian factions and their autonomy in southern Lebanon did exacerbate pre-existing tensions and provided local actors with both a rallying point and a pretext for violence. So, they were a major accelerant, even if not the fundamental cause.

 

Jordan:

Agree: The monarchy faced deep East Bank–Palestinian tensions long before Black September. Hussein’s crackdown was as much about consolidating Hashemite rule as dealing with Palestinian armed groups.

Contradiction (partly): Palestinian armed factions in Jordan weren’t just passive victims – they did operate with a degree of impunity, at times directly challenging state authority (roadblocks, quasi-state behaviour). That certainly contributed to the escalation, even if Hussein used it to his advantage.

 

Palestinian Rights:

Agree: Palestinians in Lebanon and Jordan were denied rights, and the camp system in Lebanon was especially oppressive. Expecting them to remain apolitical under those conditions is indeed unrealistic.

Contradiction (nuance): Some host states’ restrictions were not only punitive but also deliberate attempts to avoid permanent settlement, in the belief this would undermine the Palestinian cause for return. While this doesn’t excuse the harshness, it means the motive was more complex than just discrimination.

 

Militancy and Resistance:

Agree: Armed resistance as a reaction to statelessness is a global pattern (Ireland, Algeria, South Africa etc.). To treat Palestinians as uniquely destabilising is ahistorical.

Contradiction (important caveat): Unlike some of those other struggles, Palestinian factions often operated outside their homeland (in Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait). This created a dynamic where they destabilised host countries, which understandably bred resentment.

 

False Dichotomy on Israel:

Agree: The “eradicate Israel or live under Israeli control” framing is indeed a false dichotomy. The two-state solution has long been the consensus, and the PLO did formally recognise Israel in 1993. Israeli settlement policy has possibly eroded viability as much as Palestinian rejectionism.

Contradiction (slight): Not all Palestinian factions accepted Oslo or the two-state framework – Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and others openly reject Israel’s existence. So while the PLO position is often cited, Palestinian politics have always been divided.

 

Highlighting Militancy vs Israeli Actions:

Agree: It is selective to spotlight Palestinian militancy while ignoring Sabra and Shatila, repeated Israeli invasions, and systemic denial of Palestinian rights. Power asymmetry matters here.

Contradiction (small qualification): Some Palestinian groups did deliberately target civilians (airline hijackings, school and bus attacks), which is not merely “survival strategy” but intentional terror tactics. That distinction matters when weighing historical narratives.

 

Causality and Blame:

Agree: Palestinian armed conflict in host states was a symptom of dispossession. Using this as proof against Palestinian statehood is indeed like blaming the refugee for the fire.

Contradiction (caveat): While dispossession explains militancy, it doesn’t absolve armed factions of agency. Their decisions had real and often disastrous consequences for host populations – so they can’t be painted only as victims of circumstance.

 

 

It is also important to recognise that perspectives on these events vary enormously, and each side tends to emphasise the facts that best fit its own narrative. In such a highly complex and emotive history, no single-page summary can capture the full reality. Every claim can be contested with further detail, context, or counterexamples, which is precisely why the debate over Palestinians, host states, and Israel remains so enduring and polarised.

Thanks for the reply, I’ll reply when I get home, unless this beer turns into 10 😳

7 minutes ago, Chris.C said:

Thanks for the reply, I’ll reply when I get home, unless this beer turns into 10 😳

 

Better to let the beer turn into 10... 

 

While this is an interesting discussion – especially for those able to approach it without being carried away by emotion – the realities of this issue are so layered and multifaceted that no single exchange can do them justice.

 

To properly grapple with it would take pages upon pages, and days upon days, of argument and counter-argument. The lines between truth, propaganda, selective memory, and outright fabrication have been blurred and perpetuated across every medium – from state propaganda to mass media, from academic studies to the echo chambers of social media.

 

Every assertion can be challenged with another set of “facts,” and every narrative has its mirror image. This makes it not just a political debate but an almost impossible exercise in disentangling competing histories and contested truths.

20 hours ago, Somjot said:

The reason for changing their names was to conceal the past. Zionists gave Hebrew names to people and places to erase 2800 years between the fall of ancient Israel and the birth of modern Israel.

 

Like all successful criminals they are trying to rewrite their past.

 

Changing their names had NOTHING to do with concealment.  Zionists took Hebrew names as a rejection of some of the cultural effects of the Jewish diaspora.  Jews had voluntarily taken or been forced to take names which could be easily written and pronounced in the local language.  This isn't uncommon; millions of immigrants to the U.S. from many countries and religious backgrounds anglicized their names upon arrival.

 

The goal of the Zionists was to create a homeland for Jews where they wouldn't have to hide their religion and background.  Taking a Hebrew family name was part of the process.  Jews were free to proudly proclaim they were Jews with Hebrew names.

 

21 hours ago, Somjot said:

 

Why not move back Israelis to Europe, where they came from?

 

About 80% of today's  Israeli Jews were born in Israel.  That's where they come from.

 

The majority of immigrants to Israel originally came from countries in North Africa and the Middle East.  In the 1940s and 1850s, Jews were driven out of countries where they had had a presence since Roman or Biblical times. In the early 1940s, close to one million Jews were spread among Arab countries; today, maybe a total of 3,000 remain, with several Arab countries having no Jews at all.  The removal of Jews from Arab countries is  one of the most effective instances of ethnic cleansing the world has seen.

 

 Meanwhile, about 2.1 million Arabs are citizens and residents of Israel  (21% of the total population), descendants of the 150,000 Arabs who remained in Israel after its founding in 1948.  You tell me- which countries have done the most ethnic cleansing?

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-population-tops-10-million-for-1st-time/https://www.cbs.gov.il/he/mediarelease/doclib/2024/141/11_24_141e.pdf

https://www.cbs.gov.il/he/mediarelease/DocLib/2025/134/11_25_134b.pdf

 

21 hours ago, Somjot said:

Has anyone ever read what the Zionists want? Much more than todays Israel and Gaza. 

 

What sources are you using?  The infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion?  It describes a conspiracy by Jews to take over the entire world!   https://www.britannica.com/topic/Protocols-of-the-Elders-of-Zion  Some editions of the Protocols attribute it to speeches by the father of modern Zionism,  Theodor Herzl, at the First Zionist Congress in 1897.    https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/protocols-of-the-elders-of-zion/

 

In truth, mainstream Zionists, from Herzl onwards, never had eyes on any territory outside historical Palestine.

 

But some people did indeed believe Zionists wanted more than a homeland in Palestine: 

"For while the Zionists try to make the rest of the world believe that the national consciousness of the Jew finds its satisfaction in the creation of a Palestinian state, the Jews again slyly dupe the dumb Goyim. It doesn’t even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state in Palestine for the purpose of living there; all they want is a central organization for their international world swindle, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks."

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf   https://www.yadvashem.org/docs/extracts-from-mein-kampf.html

4 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

Er, it says they are. And that has got this sicko in a tizz. Can't have brown children getting fixed up in our glorious British hospitals.

 

   Don't play the race card , and do stop name calling . 

Make up some false claim and then call me a sicko based on a  false claim.

   That is poor from you .

I am concerned about future potential terrorists being given asylum in the UK, nothing to do with their skin colour 

36 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Don't play the race card , and do stop name calling . 

Make up some false claim and then call me a sicko based on a  false claim.

   That is poor from you .

I am concerned about future potential terrorists being given asylum in the UK, nothing to do with their skin colour 

Oh dear Nick, in your haste to be offended you have gone off on a tangent. 

I was referring to the repugnant views of Rupert Lowe. To anyone with the reading comprehension of a child that would have been obvious.

Read my post again, read who I quoted, read who I was clearly referring to. 

For someone that says some pretty awful things you really do act like a snowflake at times. You expect everyone else to have thick skin but yours is paper thin. And anyway I wasn't talking about you, read it again, slowly, and dispense with your faux outrage, it really is laughable.

Edit: wait, are you Rupert Lowe???? You are answering as if you are. Maybe you are, it would explain a lot. How are your new binoculars? Seen any more charity rowers? 

1 minute ago, Chris.C said:

It’s very hard not to call extremist Jews, that say they’ve never heard of Daniella Wei’s or Ben Gvir, names.

You have not once condemned anything Israel has done over the last 30 years, that is sick, this type of brainwashed fundamentalism is dangerous.

 

   I don't seem to take as much interest in Jews and Israel as you do .

I do not follow internal Israel politics as you must do .

   Even looking up Daniella Weis name on google brings no results 

https://www.google.com/search?q=Daniella+Wei&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

   I am not as obsessed with Jews/Israel as you seem to be and I've never heard of her

   Who is she ?

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

   Who is she ?

 

Israeli activist Danielle Weiss nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

Professors Amos Azaria of Ariel University and Shalom Sadik of Ben-Gurion University submitted her candidacy, citing her decades-long efforts in strengthening Jewish communities and promoting regional stability. The establishment of Jewish communities has prevented violence and enhanced security, they argued in a letter to the Nobel Prize Committee in Norway.

https://www.jwire.com.au/israeli-activist-danielle-weiss-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize/

1 hour ago, Evil Penevil said:

 

The goal of the Zionists was to create a homeland for Jews where they wouldn't have to hide their religion and background.  Taking a Hebrew family name was part of the process.  Jews were free to proudly proclaim they were Jews with Hebrew names.

 

 

What you say does not prove my statement wrong. Zionist's goal was to create a homeland for Jews.

 

In a place, which they had left more than 2000 years ago, yet they think they have a right to that place, despite there is not a single law in any juridical system supporting that.

 

Giving themselves names in Hebrew, a language that has been dead for almost 2000 years.

 

And as it had to be a safe homeland for Jews, they kicked 750.000 Arabs out and murdered many Thousands destroying 400 villages and building their own over the ruins but with differently placed buildings and streets so no one would would recognize the village that had once been there.

 

A safe place for Jews created on stolen land by displacing or killing it`s owners.

 

1 hour ago, Evil Penevil said:

 

The majority of immigrants to Israel originally came from countries in North Africa and the Middle East.  In the 1940s and 1850s, Jews were driven out of countries where they had had a presence since Roman or Biblical times. In the early 1940s, close to one million Jews were spread among Arab countries; today, maybe a total of 3,000 remain, with several Arab countries having no Jews at all.  The removal of Jews from Arab countries is  one of the most effective instances of ethnic cleansing the world has seen.

 

From all members in here YOU are telling me Arabs are effective?? That`s a first.

 

And wrong.

 

Most of them MIGRATED to start a new life in Israel. Large-scale migrations were also organized, sponsored, and facilitated by Zionist organizations such as Mossad LeAliyah Bet, the Jewish Agency, and the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society and the Israeli government's "One Million Plan" to accommodate Jewish immigrants from Arab- and Muslim-majority countries

 

Jews migrated to Israel, Arabs were displaced from Israel.

 

A slight difference, although sometimes pictured differently by using the now expired Jewish victim card.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Evil Penevil said:

 

 Meanwhile, about 2.1 million Arabs are citizens and residents of Israel  (21% of the total population), descendants of the 150,000 Arabs who remained in Israel after its founding in 1948.  You tell me- which countries have done the most ethnic cleansing?

 

Israel

 

Just take a look at that, despite it shows only a short period of time

 

 

textbook terror state if it was not for the everlasting veto of their terror collaborates.

 

 

1 hour ago, Evil Penevil said:

 

In truth, mainstream Zionists, from Herzl onwards, never had eyes on any territory outside historical Palestine.

 

Exactly and now let us take a look at historical Palestine

 

 at least 5 times bigger than actual Israel (white line)

29 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   I don't seem to take as much interest in Jews and Israel as you do .

I do not follow internal Israel politics as you must do .

   Even looking up Daniella Weis name on google brings no results 

https://www.google.com/search?q=Daniella+Wei&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

   I am not as obsessed with Jews/Israel as you seem to be and I've never heard of her

   Who is she ?

 

 

 

How strange. I just did a simple search on Google Chrome and came up with this. There are more links if you really want to do a search.

 

BTW it wasn't hard to find her and it brought up a lot of results. These are just some of them.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniella_Weiss

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc5s-baywv4

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61MmsY9bYQQ

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pPTM7kamlHk

 

And I even copied her name from your post, Daniella Weis, though it should be Weiss really.

 

It was so simple that even I could do it, and I am 81 years old.

10 minutes ago, billd766 said:

How strange. I just did a simple search on Google Chrome and came up with this. There are more links if you really want to do a search.

 

BTW it wasn't hard to find her and it brought up a lot of results. These are just some of them.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniella_Weiss

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc5s-baywv4

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61MmsY9bYQQ

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pPTM7kamlHk

 

And I even copied her name from your post, Daniella Weis, though it should be Weiss really.

 

It was so simple that even I could do it, and I am 81 years old.

It’s simple Bill, he’s lying. Said he had never heard of Ben Gvir. 

2 minutes ago, Chris.C said:

It’s simple Bill, he’s lying. Said he had never heard of Ben Gvir. 

 

  You are lying . 

I didn't say that I have never heard on Ben Gvir .

I have read his name mentioned on here a few times, but I don't know enough about him to have an opinion 

 

36 minutes ago, Chris.C said:

, that’s wrong and cowardly as you post pro right wing fundamentalist  Jewish lies every day here.

 

 

   Stop lying .

I have never posted any lies .

Back your claim up and post any lies that I have posted .

Actually this discussion is getting moronic .

Better to stop the bickering and get back on topic .,

Move on 

13 minutes ago, Chris.C said:

It’s simple Bill, he’s lying. Said he had never heard of Ben Gvir. 

Of course he is.

 

That is why he is on my ignore list and has been for a long while. The only time I see his posts is when somebody responds to him.

 

The great thing about telling the truth is that there is always links to back you up and you only have to remember the truth which is simply the truth.

 

The problem with telling lies is that there are no links to back up what you say, plus you have to remember which lie you told and who you told it to.

 

Of course you can always tell another lie to cover but that also fails when people start to fact check what you say. Once it is out on the forum or social media you can always delete it, but somebody, somewhere always has a record of what you posted, where and when.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  You are lying . 

I didn't say that I have never heard on Ben Gvir .

I have read his name mentioned on here a few times, but I don't know enough about him to have an opinion 

 

I don’t believe you. 
You had lots to say on this topic about him.

 

43 minutes ago, Somjot said:

In a place, which they had left more than 2000 years ago,

 

  Untrue ;

Jews have been living on the land for over 3000 years . Jews have continuously lived on the land for 3500 years, 

   Jews never left the land 

3 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  Untrue ;

Jews have been living on the land for over 3000 years . Jews have continuously lived on the land for 3500 years, 

   Jews never left the land 

 

Wishful thinking when Jews was the minority 100 years ago and no right to drive other people out

4 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  Untrue ;

Jews have been living on the land for over 3000 years . Jews have continuously lived on the land for 3500 years, 

   Jews never left the land 

Claiming “Jews never left the land” is pure historical revisionism. Yes, Jews have ancient ties to the land, but after the Roman expulsions and centuries of conquest, they were a tiny minority for nearly 2,000 years. The majority of Jews lived in diaspora until modern immigration waves in the 19th–20th centuries.

Saying “they never left” is like saying the Vikings still rule England because a few descendants stayed behind. History is more complicated than slogans — and pretending otherwise just erases the realities of exile, diaspora, and coexistence with other peoples who’ve lived there for centuries.

15 minutes ago, Chris.C said:

I don’t believe you. 
You had lots to say on this topic about him.

 

 

   I did not mention him once in that topic. 

I did not mention him or talk about him at all 

I have no idea who he is (although I have heard his name mentioned) 

Just now, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   I did not mention him once in that topic. 

I did not mention him or talk about him at all 

I have no idea who he is (although I have heard his name mentioned) 

Did you read the first post?

The Jewish population in Palestine increased from 56,000 in 1918 to about 88,000 in 1922, when the total population was officially estimated at 750,000. By 1939, the Jewish population had increased to 445,000 out of a total population of about 1.5 million.9. des. 2024

 

Source UN

 

 

And here is another interesting data on Jews from Ottaman to Israel state Jerusalem 

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-and-non-jewish-population-of-israel-palestine-1517-present

21 hours ago, still kicking said:

I was born in Germany, but I never had a German friend; all my friends are from different countries, and I have been married to a Thai for over 20 years. I have been in OZ for about 40 years and a few years in LOS.

 

I agree.

 

There is a reason for "Drum hüte dich vor Sturm und Wind und Deutschen, die im Ausland sind."

 

"Beware of storm and wind and Germans living abroad"

 

Can`t trust those Germans.

 

I am German.

 

I can`t even trust myself.

 

Every time I go out into the Pattaya nightlife, for an hour or two and a beer or two, well, let`s say, it never stops at "2".

 

And I seem to have developed an allergy. Against leather.

 

I guess, as every time I wake up in the morning with my shoes still on I have such a terrible headache.

 

PS: Your cat is cute.

2 hours ago, Somjot said:

 

I agree.

 

There is a reason for "Drum hüte dich vor Sturm und Wind und Deutschen, die im Ausland sind."

 

"Beware of storm and wind and Germans living abroad"

 

Can`t trust those Germans.

 

I am German.

 

I can`t even trust myself.

 

Every time I go out into the Pattaya nightlife, for an hour or two and a beer or two, well, let`s say, it never stops at "2".

 

And I seem to have developed an allergy. Against leather.

 

I guess, as every time I wake up in the morning with my shoes still on I have such a terrible headache.

 

PS: Your cat is cute.

 

    Being unable to control your drinking and having no responsibilities  that you can drink all night is nothing to be proud of .

  Its OK in your teen years , but you should have grown up by now and be needing to wake up sober in the morning  to be there for your family 

  Are you just a drunken drifter with no direction in life ?

10 hours ago, billd766 said:

How strange. I just did a simple search on Google Chrome and came up with this. There are more links if you really want to do a search.

 

BTW it wasn't hard to find her and it brought up a lot of results. These are just some of them.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniella_Weiss

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc5s-baywv4

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61MmsY9bYQQ

 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pPTM7kamlHk

 

And I even copied her name from your post, Daniella Weis, though it should be Weiss really.

 

It was so simple that even I could do it, and I am 81 years old.

 

   Well done for being 81 and checking out who she is .Since her name was misspelt and posted yesterday , I hired a vehicle , went to collect someone after they finished their day , drove to the next town, booked into a 4  * hotel, went out for a feed , went to a shopping mall , went out for another feed , back to the hotel , then out for a few beers and watched sport and crashed out by 3 AM .

   What was her name again ?