chicot Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Israel became a nation about 1300 BCE, two thousand years before the rise of Islam. Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 BCE, the Jews have had dominion over the land for one thousand years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years. The myth of a Palestinian nation was created and marketed worldwide. Jews come from Judea, not Palestinians. There is no language known as Palestinian, or any Palestinian culture distinct from that of all the Arabs in the area. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Actually the people now known as Palestinians have been there as long as have the Jews. That they had not yet become muslims does not change the fact that the ancestors of the Palestinians were in fact there. The truly ironic thing is that genetically the Jews and Arabs are quite closely related - they just chose to have different imaginary friends. Regardless of how we got here, the fact is the Israelis are going nowhere and neither are the Palestinians. The status quo is untenable. It is in Israel's own best interest to come to an agreement now when it is in a position of strength rather than have one forced upon them when this is no longer the case. Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians, Lebanese Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Well, we pretty much conquered the Iroquois and co. Romans, crusaders, Turks, Egyptians, and the like conquered the Jews (or, more accurately, conquered their land). Again, the only point of disagreement here is whether historic "right" to land means/should mean anything. The ownership of land is a natural right and that right is established historically or through agreement or even assimilation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 (edited) The ownership of land is a natural right and that right is established historically or through agreement or even assimilation. I guess it's down to an ideological disagreement then. I've never bought the "natural right" bit when it comes to property ownership. To quote Hobbes, "My own can only truly be mine if there is one unambiguously strongest power in the realm, and that power treats it as mine, protecting its status as such." Edit: Non sequitur removed. Edited February 4, 2011 by LeviF91 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Actually the people now known as Palestinians have been there as long as have the Jews. That they had not yet become muslims does not change the fact that the ancestors of the Palestinians were in fact there. The truly ironic thing is that genetically the Jews and Arabs are quite closely related - they just chose to have different imaginary friends. Regardless of how we got here, the fact is the Israelis are going nowhere and neither are the Palestinians. The status quo is untenable. It is in Israel's own best interest to come to an agreement now when it is in a position of strength rather than have one forced upon them when this is no longer the case. Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians, Lebanese The Palestinians are a closer genetic brother to australopithecus afarensis then to Jews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 The ownership of land is a natural right and that right is established historically or through agreement or even assimilation. Or by military might!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 The Palestinians are a closer genetic brother to australopithecus afarensis then to Jews. Thats one ugly looking chicot. :lol: :lol: http://upload.wikime...onstruction.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Or by military might!! Or by the Supreme Court's puzzling interpretation of eminent domain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 The Palestinians are a closer genetic brother to australopithecus afarensis then to Jews. My apologies. I never realised you were a racist. Sorry to keep you from your KKK meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 My apologies. I never realised you were a racist. Sorry to keep you from your KKK meeting. We're all equally close australopithecus africensis. Don't confuse his ignorance with racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 My apologies. I never realised you were a racist. Sorry to keep you from your KKK meeting. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Or by the Supreme Court's puzzling interpretation of eminent domain. That reminds me. In addition to hedge funds and college basketball, Connecticut has New London's new, thriving waterfront development. Thanks USSC! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 We're all equally close australopithecus africensis. Don't confuse his ignorance with racism. oh, thanks Tom....I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 We're all equally close australopithecus africensis. Don't confuse his ignorance with racism. I think you're confusing his racism with ignorance I think his intent was pretty clear and, to me, to try and imply that any people or ethnic group is subhuman is racism pure and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 oh, thanks Tom....I think. Yeah...I don't know where you got that "Palestinians are closer..." crap, when all homo sapiens is evolved from Lucy. I mean, really, that was just too stupid to be racist... ...which is a neat trick, really, considering how stupid racism usually is. I think you're confusing his racism with ignorance I think his intent was pretty clear and, to me, to try and imply that any people or ethnic group is subhuman is racism pure and simple. I disagree. I think his intent was innocent, but brainless. I mean, maybe I'm being generous here...but this would be the first overtly racist thing I've ever seen him post (on a board where we've had more than a few preaching Nazi eugenics) if he were really, truly saying Palestinians are so much closer to orangutans than Jews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Yeah...I don't know where you got that "Palestinians are closer..." crap, when all homo sapiens is evolved from Lucy. I mean, really, that was just too stupid to be racist... ...which is a neat trick, really, considering how stupid racism usually is. I disagree. I think his intent was innocent, but brainless. I mean, maybe I'm being generous here...but this would be the first overtly racist thing I've ever seen him post (on a board where we've had more than a few preaching Nazi eugenics) if he were really, truly saying Palestinians are so much closer to orangutans than Jews. Fair enough. I'll assume he's brainless rather than racist then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Yeah...I don't know where you got that "Palestinians are closer..." crap, when all homo sapiens is evolved from Lucy. I mean, really, that was just too stupid to be racist... ...which is a neat trick, really, considering how stupid racism usually is. I disagree. I think his intent was innocent, but brainless. I mean, maybe I'm being generous here...but this would be the first overtly racist thing I've ever seen him post (on a board where we've had more than a few preaching Nazi eugenics) if he were really, truly saying Palestinians are so much closer to orangutans than Jews. Speaking of which, did WisconsinBillzFan get banned or did he just take off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I think you're confusing his racism with ignorance I think his intent was pretty clear and, to me, to try and imply that any people or ethnic group is subhuman is racism pure and simple. ROTFL, Ok before I accept the tittle of racist can someone explain to me what racism is because it does not seem to be based on race. Science makes no distinction, we are all Homo sapiens sapiens. Would calling me an anti-sapiens be more accurate or maybe anti-homo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 ROTFL, Ok before I accept the tittle of racist can someone explain to me what racism is because it does not seem to be based on race. Science makes no distinction, we are all Homo sapiens sapiens. Would calling me an anti-sapiens be more accurate or maybe anti-homo? Better go with the former. If you go by the latter, the gays will be up in arms; it's a little confusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 (edited) ROTFL, Ok before I accept the tittle of racist can someone explain to me what racism is because it does not seem to be based on race. Science makes no distinction, we are all Homo sapiens sapiens. Would calling me an anti-sapiens be more accurate or maybe anti-homo? Definition of race: n. 1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics. 2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race. 3. A genealogical line; a lineage. 4. Humans considered as a group. You're assuming race has to mean 4) but it can also mean 1-3. Edited February 4, 2011 by chicot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 ROTFL, Ok before I accept the tittle of racist can someone explain to me what racism is because it does not seem to be based on race. Science makes no distinction, we are all Homo sapiens sapiens. Would calling me an anti-sapiens be more accurate or maybe anti-homo? oh totally anti-sapiens or at least anti-sapience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts