Pages: 1 … 3 4 5

 

2006-06-30 02:33:10
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6784

easy-skanking wrote:

Amin al-Husseini was a leader not acting alone.. in ww1 Palestine was part of the Ottoman empire and they, aside from the thousands that joined the Ottoman army,  had an army and they contributed to the "army of Islam" 14000-25000 men. Then in ww2 al-Hussani again a leader this time on Hitlers side helped recruit some 21,000 Arabs for the SS + more unknown. You're kidding yourself if you think Islamic extremism is some isolated acts of a few in Palestine. They elected a terrorist group bent on the destruction of Israel as a govt. Every time you see a PLO and now Hamas rally thousand take to the street, it is widespread.
It is natural to adopt the ethos 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'. You can't blame some Palestinians for wanting to side with someone who they shared a common enemy with. Arabs in the SS? Are you au fait with the whole 'pure aryan race' guff that Hitler wanted to dominate the world? SS members were selected on the basis of racial purity - I hardly think 21,000 'dirty' arabs would have slipped through the race requirements for Hitler's praetorian guard!!! You must be confusing the SS with the wehrmacht!
They elected Hamas partly out of desparation at the lack of progress Fatah seemed to be making on the establishment of a Palestinian state and partly as a smack in the face against the corruption in the Fatah party. I've been to Palestine and all of the Palestinians I met were well-informed individuals that were surprisingly secular and wordly wise. You are persisting in generalising an entire population on the acts of a particular group.

Incidentally, Hamas have implicitly recognised that a state of Israel should exist. So your arguments about destruction of the state of Israel have been compromised somewhat.

easy-skanking wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

that the British government supported Zionist plans for a Jewish "national home" in Palestine, with the condition that nothing should be done which might prejudice the rights of existing communities there.
They abided by that for 35 years but things change. They changed after Arab Islamic violence against them so its reasonable.
I have serious issues with that comment. Arab islamic violence against them? Which 'them' are you referring to? Are you talking about the brits or the jews. If you are talking about the brits then please note that acts were carried out by the jews against the brits also (by the Haganah, Lehi and Irgun). If you think the brits withdrawing from the region was them giving a tacit 'green-light' to a state of Israel then you're wrong. They  had no idea what outcome would result. It could have ended up as an arabic state of Palestine for all they knew.

You are obviously an advocate of 'might makes right'. I'm afraid that I don't endorse that principle/viewpoint.

easy-skanking wrote:

maybe you have difficulty Reading but the San Remo conference reviews the British policies in Palestine and gave them approval.... approval of the LEAGUE OF NATIONS
Skanking - the fact of the matter is that neither the brits or the League of Nations ever agreed to an actual state of Israel. In fact the brits made quite sure to distance themselves from that interpretation of the phrase 'homeland'. And remember 'with the condition that nothing should be done which might prejudice the rights of existing communities there'.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-30 02:34:47)

2006-06-30 02:59:32
B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|7070|Cologne, Germany

Ikarti wrote:

Alexanderthegrape wrote:

Thats why your a warrior and Ikartis a wuss, gs.
I was really enjoying this thread until he showed up and began polluting it.
Go away Ikartis, your frothing at the mouth, drooling diarrea of the keyboard is not needed here.
Again Alexander, wherever you may place me on your sacred internet social ladder, I'll still be above you. Just look at the drivel you post yourself.

On a serious note, are you actually mentally handicapped?
what is it with you two ? Stop the personal attacks, I am warning you. I don't care who started it, this is not some high school schoolyard. Stay on topic, concentrate on conducting a serious debate. If you can't you might just as well leave.
2006-06-30 03:22:12
Xietsu
Banned
+50|6785
Everyone knows negative libel can affect a reputation, even if false. I think you ought to punish the incendiary inflamer.
2006-06-30 03:49:56
B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|7070|Cologne, Germany

Xietsu wrote:

Everyone knows negative libel can affect a reputation, even if false. I think you ought to punish the incendiary inflamer.
you may want to explain the first sentence in more detail. Remember, I am not a native speaker of english.
2006-06-30 03:53:38
Xietsu
Banned
+50|6785

B.Schuss wrote:

Xietsu wrote:

Everyone knows negative libel can affect a reputation, even if false. I think you ought to punish the incendiary inflamer.
you may want to explain the first sentence in more detail. Remember, I am not a native speaker of english.
One who is an incendiary inflamer is, in a more simplified reference of words, an agitating agitator.
2006-06-30 04:32:40
B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|7070|Cologne, Germany

Xietsu wrote:

B.Schuss wrote:

Xietsu wrote:

Everyone knows negative libel can affect a reputation, even if false. I think you ought to punish the incendiary inflamer.
you may want to explain the first sentence in more detail. Remember, I am not a native speaker of english.
One who is an incendiary inflamer is, in a more simplified reference of words, an agitating agitator.
oh, I got your second sentence alright. It was your first sentence that was beyond my comprehension.
The "negative libel" part, you know....
2006-06-30 04:37:14
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6784

B.Schuss wrote:

Xietsu wrote:

B.Schuss wrote:

you may want to explain the first sentence in more detail. Remember, I am not a native speaker of english.
One who is an incendiary inflamer is, in a more simplified reference of words, an agitating agitator.
oh, I got your second sentence alright. It was your first sentence that was beyond my comprehension.
The "negative libel" part, you know....
What he means is that slander can affect someons reputation even if it is completely untrue. Promoting a false idea about someone will put a subliminal message in peoples mind and colour their opinion of the 'slandered' person.

PS Xietsu always unnecessarily complicates things with the way he uses English. Often what he writes isn't strictly correct grammatically and sometimes he writes in a manner that no English-speaking person would write. For instance no one would ever say 'in a more simplified reference of words' - that phrase he used is completely over the top. That's like say 'I am going to refer to some words of the english language to describe something to you.' Completely unnecessary!

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-30 04:40:45)

2006-06-30 04:40:26
G3|Genius
Pope of BF2s
+355|6855|Sea to globally-cooled sea
Muslims simply do not believe in Live and Let Live.  Their motto is, if you're not for us, you're against us.  And, unfortunately, they believe that anyone who isn't for them ought to die.

Go Israel!
2006-06-30 04:42:28
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6784

G3|Genius wrote:

Muslims simply do not believe in Live and Let Live.  Their motto is, if you're not for us, you're against us.  And, unfortunately, they believe that anyone who isn't for them ought to die.

Go Israel!
Generalise much?
2006-06-30 05:11:46
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6778|Southeastern USA

CameronPoe wrote:

B.Schuss wrote:

Xietsu wrote:


One who is an incendiary inflamer is, in a more simplified reference of words, an agitating agitator.
oh, I got your second sentence alright. It was your first sentence that was beyond my comprehension.
The "negative libel" part, you know....
What he means is that slander can affect someons reputation even if it is completely untrue. Promoting a false idea about someone will put a subliminal message in peoples mind and colour their opinion of the 'slandered' person.

PS Xietsu always unnecessarily complicates things with the way he uses English. Often what he writes isn't strictly correct grammatically and sometimes he writes in a manner that no English-speaking person would write. For instance no one would ever say 'in a more simplified reference of words' - that phrase he used is completely over the top. That's like say 'I am going to refer to some words of the english language to describe something to you.' Completely unnecessary!
ain't that the truth, I keep meaning to ask Xietsu where he's from, so maybe I could figure out what the hell he's talking about sometimes, sad thing is it makes it impossible to debate or argue with him, so he probably adds notches to his win column all the time, which may be justified...........but I don't guess I'll never know for sure...
2006-06-30 05:13:08
{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank
U.S. > Iran
+497|6807|Florida
Ikarti, if you dislike this country so much, whats stopping you from leaving?  Im sure as hell not and I dont think many others would either.  Its understandable if your still in highschool and living with mom and dad.  You must be, because if I felt like you, I would have left the country along time ago.
2006-06-30 05:16:55
easy-skanking
Member
+43|6765

CameronPoe wrote:

You can't blame some Palestinians for wanting to side with someone who they shared a common enemy with.
Actually i can and i do. Amin al-Husseini was well aware of Hitlers solution for the Jews and thats one of the reasons he was so fond of him. Quite the evil pack of scumbags.

You must be confusing the SS with the wehrmacht!
No Himmler made a SS unit of mostly Balkans saying that they were not slavs or turks but aryans. However there were more units recruited by al-Husseini and thousands of them were Palestinians.

CameronPoe wrote:

If you think the brits withdrawing from the region was them giving a tacit 'green-light' to a state of Israel then you're wrong. They  had no idea what outcome would result. It could have ended up as an arabic state of Palestine for all they knew.
Feel free to stop telling me what i think. I am refrencing "they" as Jews.

CameronPoe wrote:

the fact of the matter is that neither the brits or the League of Nations ever agreed to an actual state of Israel.
Never said anything or the sort. All i was doing was simply giving the reason that they have a moral and ethical claim to migrate there.

CameronPoe wrote:

What right, they might have asked, did these people have to come and settle in our land?
The choice to create a state of Israel is thiers. You seem to have trouble seperating migrating there to creating the state of Israel. Personally i think if they decided that enough is enough and they needed to segregate the population for self defense and preservation then thats thier decision to make. I never have said i think that they are right for making the state of Israel ..truth is I really dont know if they had to but i trust they did.
2006-06-30 06:02:58
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6784

easy-skanking wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

You can't blame some Palestinians for wanting to side with someone who they shared a common enemy with.
Actually i can and i do. Amin al-Husseini was well aware of Hitlers solution for the Jews and thats one of the reasons he was so fond of him. Quite the evil pack of scumbags.

easy-skanking wrote:

You must be confusing the SS with the wehrmacht!
No Himmler made a SS unit of mostly Balkans saying that they were not slavs or turks but aryans. However there were more units recruited by al-Husseini and thousands of them were Palestinians.
Amin Al-Husseini was not some kind of de-facto Palestinian president-elect, representative of all Palestinians. You are still generalising because you want to advance your position on Israeli justification for the acts the Israelis committed as well as wanting to cast the general palestinian populace in a particular light. Palestine was being INVADED by immigrant jews. That is reason enough to take action against them. I don't think every Palestinian household had a copy of Mein Kampf on the coffee table - the picture which you are trying to paint!!

BTW I have searched the net and can find no references to Palestinian arabs in any SS division.

easy-skanking wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

the fact of the matter is that neither the brits or the League of Nations ever agreed to an actual state of Israel.
Never said anything or the sort. All i was doing was simply giving the reason that they have a moral and ethical claim to migrate there.
The fact that some distant country selected by non-Palestinians to govern a region populated by Palestinians make some unilateral declaration concerning the Palestinians, above the heads of the Palestinians, does not give anyone from outside Palestine a moral or ethical right to migrate there, IMO.

easy-skanking wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

What right, they might have asked, did these people have to come and settle in our land?
The choice to create a state of Israel is thiers. You seem to have trouble seperating migrating there to creating the state of Israel. Personally i think if they decided that enough is enough and they needed to segregate the population for self defense and preservation then thats thier decision to make. I never have said i think that they are right for making the state of Israel ..truth is I really dont know if they had to but i trust they did.
What you say is correct. The choice of the immigrants to create the state of Israel in Palestine did belong to the immigrants. I just happen to believe that it was the wrong choice and that it created one of the biggest festering sores of injustice on the surface of the planet. My belief is that they did not have the right to do what they did.
2006-06-30 06:33:23
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6778|Southeastern USA

Xietsu wrote:

Regardless, the focus should be on the predispositions in attitude that genetic tendencies provide for those who often sway to a sexual orientation of homosexuality. To affix a negative title upon such a matter of recreational preference is to be petty, suppositional, foolhardy, and downright FUCKING STUPID.

(P.S. CAST YO' VOTES NEG[RO]S! [p.s. I'm not referencing this thread {in this major "P.S." |as identified by its being capitalized /the new form of denoting shades of significance behind post scripts|\}.])

(P.S.#2. OHMUHGAW-EIYOOZ'DKNOOKAIRUHKTEURSAZZSUBPAIRENTHEHTIKKUHLS [p.s.#2. {modern refinement of} phonetics {--by teh troo one and only--} for the win, froozles])
ok now he's just fucking with us (from the homo/abortion thread)
2006-06-30 06:41:07
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6784

kr@cker wrote:

Xietsu wrote:

Regardless, the focus should be on the predispositions in attitude that genetic tendencies provide for those who often sway to a sexual orientation of homosexuality. To affix a negative title upon such a matter of recreational preference is to be petty, suppositional, foolhardy, and downright FUCKING STUPID.

(P.S. CAST YO' VOTES NEG[RO]S! [p.s. I'm not referencing this thread {in this major "P.S." |as identified by its being capitalized /the new form of denoting shades of significance behind post scripts|\}.])

(P.S.#2. OHMUHGAW-EIYOOZ'DKNOOKAIRUHKTEURSAZZSUBPAIRENTHEHTIKKUHLS [p.s.#2. {modern refinement of} phonetics {--by teh troo one and only--} for the win, froozles])
ok now he's just fucking with us (from the homo/abortion thread)
I think somebody might be having a nervous breakdown..... LOL
2006-06-30 06:41:28
easy-skanking
Member
+43|6765

CameronPoe wrote:

Amin Al-Husseini was not some kind of de-facto Palestinian president-elect
He was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem a powerfull position he used to incite arab violence and orchestrated many riots and attacks on jews. Yassir Arafat was a pupil and ally of his and refered to himself as Husseini's first soldier. You try to portray this as some isolated acts of a few when it was much more prevalent than that.

CameronPoe wrote:

The fact that some distant country selected by non-Palestinians to govern a region populated by Palestinians make some unilateral declaration concerning the Palestinians, above the heads of the Palestinians, does not give anyone from outside Palestine a moral or ethical right to migrate there, IMO.
The acts of the men and youth in wartime will allways be a projection upon the rest of thier country. People blame Germans for the holocaust even though less than 1% had an actual hand in it. If the Palestinians only gave 20% of thier military aged men then thats still more than enough to be reflected as an act of thier country. My point isnt that this is why Israel is there or why the jews can do whatever they want but this is the reason i think Britain and the League of Nations had the right to make decisions.

CameronPoe wrote:

I don't think every Palestinian household had a copy of Mein Kampf on the coffee table - the picture which you are trying to paint!!
Not really but Husseini being an anti-Semite and thousand of Palestinians fighting on the nazi side is a pretty awfull thing to do. They should be held accountable for thier alliances.

Last edited by easy-skanking (2006-06-30 06:44:27)

2006-06-30 06:53:26
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6784
Skanking I know acts of violence were committed upon the influx of jews to Palestine. I'm telling you that the reason for the violence was not some widespread palestinian belief in the preachings of Mein Kampf. Al-Husseini latched onto nazi support because it suited his aims. It wasn't because he was idealogically aligned with Hilter's belief in a third reich of aryans that would last a thousand years.

I believe the Palestinians had to right to wage war against an uncontrollable inundation of foreign nationals. To not do so, and history confirms this, would be that they would concede control of their land to the foreign invaders. My opinion remains unchanged - The League of Nations would not have had the right to create a state of Israel in Palestine.

Both Jews and Arabs are semites Skanking. Al-Husseini couldn't have been 'anti-semitic' because if he was he would have had to take his own life! If Al-Husseini created concentration camps and committed war crimes then yes he should be held accountable. To my knowledge, that kind of practice did not take place in 1933-45 Palestine. Whether or not he committed war crimes doesn't make the creation of Israel any more justified however.
2006-06-30 06:56:15
Jinto-sk
Laid Back Yorkshireman
+183|6820|Scarborough Yorkshire England

Capt. Foley wrote:

I think we should just let it begin. Im tired of all this BS thats going on between them. The Palstinians(didnt spell it right) said they would stop attacks if the Isrealies left the Gaza Stripe, they never stoped. I think this should just be finished off now unless the Isrealies want to keep getting attacked.
Ok lets have a war between 2 countries just because you are tired of hearing about it (Plus all you others who agreed let them fight - don't know how to do multiple quotes).  Sorry but this does not justify war because you are tired of hearing about it, yes it is a pain and I agree it does get boring listening to reports of conflicts all the time, but wishing 2 countries 2 go to war (not our place to stop them) has to be wrong, we do not know the reprecusions of what could happen. Other countries may join in etc. and before we know it WW3 could be on the cards.  Let me put it this way - your country + it's neigbour have been arguing for years, so you would agree to a full on war because other countries are fed up of listening to you bitch at each other.  That endangers everyone you know and yourself but hey if it makes all the other countries happy lets get it on - BOLLOCKS.  You are wishing the deaths of others because it will not effect you and you are fed up of listening to the conflict on the news.  (I myself am tired of the continuing tensions between Israel and the Palestinians and wish they would sort it out, but I would never want them to go to war.)
Anyway awaiting the flames
2006-06-30 07:21:30
easy-skanking
Member
+43|6765
some more mistakes youre making..

CAmeronPoe wrote:

I'm telling you that the reason for the violence was not some widespread palestinian belief in the preachings of Mein Kampf.
never said that

CameronPoe wrote:

The League of Nations would not have had the right to create a state of Israel in Palestine.
Maybe youre confusing timelines. I never said the League of Nations made the state of Israel. In 1948 when Israel became a state there was no such thing as the League of Nations. They did however have the right to determine politaical directions of the former Ottoman empire specifically Palestine *which at that point didnt exist* for thier role in WW1.

CameronPoe wrote:

Al-Husseini couldn't have been 'anti-semitic'
while the literal definiton of a "semite" includes arabs the term-anti semite in 20th/21st century vernacular is associated with jews. that and talking about this is semantical.
2006-06-30 07:30:54
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6784

easy-skanking wrote:

some more mistakes youre making..

CAmeronPoe wrote:

I'm telling you that the reason for the violence was not some widespread palestinian belief in the preachings of Mein Kampf.
never said that
I never said you said that. I was saying that some of the things you mentioned seemed to imply that many/all Palestinians were ideologically aligned with nazis.

easy-skanking wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

The League of Nations would not have had the right to create a state of Israel in Palestine.
Maybe youre confusing timelines. I never said the League of Nations made the state of Israel. In 1948 when Israel became a state there was no such thing as the League of Nations. They did however have the right to determine politaical directions of the former Ottoman empire specifically Palestine *which at that point didnt exist* for thier role in WW1.
I'm not confusing timelines. That sentence responds to assertions you made based on the Balfour Declaration. I still hold to my view that, in general, no external body has the right to impose terms and conditions on the indigenous people of a particular region (unless of course the people of that land are pursuing a policy of expansionism or interfering with the sovereignty of another nation).

easy-skanking wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Al-Husseini couldn't have been 'anti-semitic'
while the literal definiton of a "semite" includes arabs the term-anti semite in 20th/21st century vernacular is associated with jews. that and talking about this is semantical.
Agreed.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-30 07:33:54)

2006-06-30 09:06:03
konfusion
mostly afk
+480|6779|CH/BR - in UK

Lets all watch CameronPoe and easy-skanking discuss...It's a lot more interesting than any of the other posts, isn't it ....including this one.
2006-06-30 09:15:19
RicardoBlanco
The English
+177|6797|Oxford

CameronPoe wrote:

B.Schuss wrote:

Xietsu wrote:


One who is an incendiary inflamer is, in a more simplified reference of words, an agitating agitator.
oh, I got your second sentence alright. It was your first sentence that was beyond my comprehension.
The "negative libel" part, you know....
What he means is that slander can affect someons reputation even if it is completely untrue. Promoting a false idea about someone will put a subliminal message in peoples mind and colour their opinion of the 'slandered' person.

PS Xietsu always unnecessarily complicates things with the way he uses English. Often what he writes isn't strictly correct grammatically and sometimes he writes in a manner that no English-speaking person would write. For instance no one would ever say 'in a more simplified reference of words' - that phrase he used is completely over the top. That's like say 'I am going to refer to some words of the english language to describe something to you.' Completely unnecessary!
I was just thinking the same about Xietsu, try and be a bit more concise mate!
2006-06-30 13:05:12
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6778|Southeastern USA
it doesn't help that I'm usuall drunk when I read X's posts, wait, should we start a thread to deal with this phenomenon? Maybe "what the hell did Xietsu just say"
2006-06-30 13:37:06
Xietsu
Banned
+50|6785

CameronPoe wrote:

B.Schuss wrote:

Xietsu wrote:


One who is an incendiary inflamer is, in a more simplified reference of words, an agitating agitator.
oh, I got your second sentence alright. It was your first sentence that was beyond my comprehension.
The "negative libel" part, you know....
What he means is that slander can affect someons reputation even if it is completely untrue. Promoting a false idea about someone will put a subliminal message in peoples mind and colour their opinion of the 'slandered' person.

PS Xietsu always unnecessarily complicates things with the way he uses English. Often what he writes isn't strictly correct grammatically and sometimes he writes in a manner that no English-speaking person would write. For instance no one would ever say 'in a more simplified reference of words' - that phrase he used is completely over the top. That's like say 'I am going to refer to some words of the english language to describe something to you.' Completely unnecessary!
I am an English speaking person, and I would write like that. Moreover, I would like to rebuff the fact that it (the "in a more simplified reference of words" phrase) was made in humor, as agitating agitator has an awkward sense to it. For the majority of my comments, roundabout oddities aren't used.
2006-06-30 13:42:12
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6758|Global Command

B.Schuss wrote:

what is it with you two ? Stop the personal attacks, I am warning you. I don't care who started it, this is not some high school schoolyard. Stay on topic, concentrate on conducting a serious debate. If you can't you might just as well leave.
With respect, his words have been vile and hateful, including calling for the torture murders of U.S. persons.
If you notice his posts, you'll find an extreme example of the worst kind of hate speach. I have stated that I choose to ignore his karma's and posts from here forward. That's only because I am a user and not a mod; if I was taking into consideration quality control and public image and I was a mod of bf2s.com I would have banned him a long time ago. I could say more but...
     Whatever.
     I heed your warning.

Last edited by Alexanderthegrape (2006-06-30 13:42:36)

 

Pages: 1 … 3 4 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard