Re: We're Muslims. We can't be blamed.

On Aug 9, 2:09 pm, Shlomo <stanle...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 9, 4:40 pm, Theodore Herzl <AntiZioN...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 9, 1:05 pm, Shlomo <stanle...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 9, 3:41 pm, Theodore Herzl <AntiZioN...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 8, 2:42 pm, Shlomo <stanle...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 8, 4:48 pm, Theodore Herzl <AntiZioN...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 6, 7:51 pm, "Stan Engel" <stan_en...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

One thing that ZioNazis like to forget is that they were the invaders
of Palestine, and the Arabs/Palestinians were simply defending their
homeland, cutlure and rich heritage from the invading hordes of
violent European ZioNazis with no connection to the land what so ever,
except by their conversion to a cult.

to the land. They didn't invade anything! The Arabs had about as
much right to begin a War of Genocide against them as the Jews
would've had in defending the Lower East Side against the arrival of
Puerto Ricans.

Perhaps you can explain why the Zionists resorted to terrorism against
the legal and legitimate government of the Mandate and how a cultural
attachment (cult membership) grants you legal rights to jack squat?

The Zionist terrorism against the British was based on the fact that
Britain was in violation of international agreements by stopping
Jewish immigration in 1936 in response to Arab riots. Basically, the
British made it known that they will give terrorists what they want.

What international agreement?

All the various agreements incorporated in the 1919 Paris Peace
Conference and League of Nations actions regarding the governing of
former Central Powers territories and restoration of national

But the British were in charge of the Mandate, and thus were the legal
and legitimate authority and thus were not in violation of themselves.

The British were the legal and
legitimate government of the Mandate per the UN and thus any
disagreements that Israel's founders should have been taken before the
UN, but instead the behaved like common every day, run of the mill and
despicable terrorists. And puhleeeeze, stop trying to justify
terrorism when it suites your needs.

I notice that you totally ignore the War of Genocide that the Arab
Murders and Terrorists have been waging against the Zionists since

Yet it was the Zionists who picked the fight when they began to invade
Palestine with the stated goal of taking it over. The indigenous
population of Palestine did not hunt down Jews in Europe and start a
war, they defended themselves against the invading Zionists, so stop
putting the cart before the horse.

I've answered your point. There would have been no need for Zionist
terrorism against the British had they not been in violation of
international law regarding the re-establishment of the Jewish
homeland in Palestine and had they not caved in to Arab terrorism.

As I have shown, there was no international law, the British
controlled the Mandate and thus were the legal and legitimate
authority and rulers of the Mandate. If the ZioNazis had a problem
with that, they could have used legal means, gone to the UN or taken
it up in the international courts instead of resorting to terrorism,
but like the ZioNazis we see today, they behaved like common, every
day, run of the mill and very despicable terrorists.

What the cultural and ancestral attachment means is that the Zionists
were not colonists moving to somebody else's country, but rather, they
were an indigenous people returning to their own homeland. They were
given sovereignty based on their being a supermajority of the
population in the land allocated to them under international law.

One, they were not a majoriity and did not even compromise 30% of the
population. That is a fact.

They were almost 65% of the population in the area allocated to them
by the UN in the 1947 Partition Plan. Two nations? Remember? That
was the plan (like Pakistan and India).

The UN never allocated them jack squat in 1947, the General Assembly
made suggestions to the Security Council, but it did not have the
legal authority to partition land, so that exposes your lie on its
own The UN, at the recommendation of the GA, did send Count Folk
Bernadette to make a recommendation on a partition to the SC, but
Jewish terrorists murdered him and his driver to prevent it.

Second, Hardly any of the European Jews cat prove their ancestors ever
lived in Palestine, they produced no prior deeds etc. that proved that
they, or their ancestors, had ever lived there and most all are not
even Semitic. You cannot claim it is your homeland is Palestine any
more than a Catholic can claim Itally is their homeland and start
stealing land.

The Zionists did not come and CLAIM property; they LEGALLY PURCHASED

No they did not, the stole it. And besides, when a Jew buys land in
Miami, it does not become part of Israel .....Understand?????

The Zionists did not steal property; they LEGALLY PURCHASED IT!!! Any
later acquisition of property through conquest came as a consequence
of wars that THE ARABS provoked, and lost.

Jews did not even own the majority of the land, and regardless it was
still part of the mandate as ownership only goes so far.

Seems that I remember that it was the Palestinian government under the
mandate attempts to stop the illegal immigration into Palestine under
the Mandate that the Zionists tried to claim justified their terrorist
attacks against the legal and legitimate government

As explained, the British cutting off Jewish immigration is what was
illegal, but at the same time, the British made it clear that
terrorists will get what they want.

Illegal according to whom. Please cite the ruling authority who ruled
the actions of the legal and legitimate government of Palestine

The 1919 Paris Peace Conference and the League of Nations Mandate
included the re-restablishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

The British were in charge of the the Mandate you fool. I asked
what ruling authority deemed the actions of the legal and legitimate
government of Palestine illegal

Answer: NOBODY

Did the UN rule that it was illegal for the legal and legitimate
government of the Mandate to control illegal immigration? Or did
your ZioNAzi buddies just not like the laws of the government and
decided to start engaging in acts of terorism?

This point has been answered. By caving in to Arab terrorism and
stopping Jewish immigration, the British were in violation of the
treaties and other international law specifying the re-establishment
of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Who ruled that they were in violation of the treaties and
international law? There certainly was no UN ruling to that effect
and the international courts never ruled the British were in

So who made that Judgement Shlomo?

The terrorists themselves?

Do you have a different reason why Israel's founders engaged in acts
of terrorism? Do you think it was to make friends?

It was to force the legal government to abide by international law.

What international law is there that requires sovereign countries to
allow for Jewish immigration are you talking about.

Answered already, at least 3 times in this response alone.

So you're saying that when a group doesn't agree with the legal and
legitimate government that it should just engage in terrorism.
Forget the courts, forget the UN, just start murdering people like a

Now I'm wondering if Timothy McVay was not a Zionists Jew after all,
as that is precisely what he did.

And who started the war of Genocide? Who destroyed whole villages,
wiped entire towns off the map, forcibly denied the indigenous
population from their lands Shlomo?

Here is a clue....It was not the indigenous Arab and Palestinian

Here's a hint, Teddy. The Arabs began their War of Genocide against
the Jews soon after the start of what's known as the First Aliyah.
This is why the Halutzim (pioneers) had to organize their own defense

The first Aliyah or first attempted invasion of Palestine by European
ZioNazis. They chose to try to invade Palestine and were met by
opposition, but the Arabs and Palestine never did anything but defend
their homeland agaisnt invasion.

In other words, the ZioNazis picked the fight.

At this point, you're just an Arab liar who believes his own lies.
They were LEGAL IMMIGRANTS authorized by the Sultan of the Ottoman

Was the Sultan or the British given the control of the Mandate by the
League of Nations?

Furthermore Teddy, very few of our people are converts, the last
significant conversion being that of the Idumeans, also a people
indigenous to the Mideast, during the time of the Hasmoneans. The
Khazars would be a very small part of our population.

Most are converts or are descendants of converts, which means no
connection to Palestine except by membership in a club. The people
whose land was stolen and whose villages, towns and culture was
destroyed by the invading Zionists had family histories in the region
that go back for hundreds, if not thousands of years, while the vast
majority, if not all, of the Zionist imigrants had no connection or
family history in the region what so ever, and instead claimed a god
given right which is absoulutely without merit.

What you call "invading Zionists" were in fact LEGAL IMMIGRANTS. And
I'm afraid you're totally wrong about our not being descended from
those Jews who lived in what later became Palestine during the time in
Jewish history known as the Second Commonwealth.

Well they cannot prove it. Were not Semitic and didn't even speak
the language of the region, much less even Hebrew. And they were
not legal, which is why they engaged in acts of terrorism Schomo.

Our religion is one of ancestry, and we have not sought converts since
the time of the Roman expulsion. The fact that I'm Jewish means that
many of my ancestors lived in Palestine during the time of the Second

Yet people are still converting and you cannot prove that your
ancestors EVER lived there, and certainly not recently enough to
elevate your rights over those who have lived their continuously for

And before you pick on the phrase "many of my ancestors", there was
clearly some mixing of populations, which is why the US Census Bureau
simply classifies me as "white", while a Jew from Ethiopia would be
classified as of "African ancestry". In fact, in reference to the
rape of Jewish women in communities along the Rhine by the Crusaders,
I once joked with a co-worker of English ancestry that he and I are
probably related. But the fact remains is that my religion is by
ancestry, and that goes back to Palestine during 530BC - 70.- Hide quoted text -

And you do not have black hair, brown eyes or dark skin. Face it
Shlomo, your no more Semitic nor have any more rights to claim
ancestral rights than I do.

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -