jump to last post 1-36 of 36 discussions (272 posts)

And you worry about Sharia???

  1. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    A Bill, “H.R. 4133: United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012,” legally binds America to a “Jewish” state.

    The Resolution was passed under a procedure called “suspension of the rules” typically reserved for non-controversial topics requiring little debate and allowing for a quick vote.

    Middle East specialist, Dr Stephen Zunes, outlines a number of provisions of the Bill:

    It is to be US policy to be forever committed to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.

    • This is the first time in history that Congress committed America to the religious makeup of a foreign state.

    Also, any peace settlement would be contingent on Christian and Muslim Palestinians recognizing Israel as a “Jewish” state relegating themselves to 2nd class citizens and forfeiting all Palestinian refugees the right of return to their stolen homes and lands.

    It is to be US policy to help Israel preserve its qualitative military edge in the region.

    It is to be US policy to veto any “one-sided” Resolutions at the United Nations Security Council directed at Israel.

    IN THE MIDST of a deluge of Congressmen pledging their “undying dedication” to the Jewish state of Israel, (the Bill passed with an overwhelming 411-2), only Ron Paul (and Joe Donnelly) stood up against the ongoing Judaic infiltration of legislative policy.

    Ron Paul boldly pointed out with regard to a “US commitment” to the security of Israel as a “Jewish” State that not even the US Constitution commits to the security of one particular religious group.

    On the contrary, said Paul, the Constitution prohibits the establishment of any particular religion in the US.

    Paul also underlined the dangers of this legislation by arguing that according to the Constitution, American policy should be to protect the security of the United States and not to guarantee the religious, ethnic, or cultural composition of a foreign country.

    Ron Paul asserted his opposition: 

    “While I believe that Israel should be free to determine for itself what is necessary for its national security, I do not believe that these decisions should be underwritten by US taxpayers and backed up by the US military.” 

    The sponsors of the Bill: House Majority leader Eric Cantor; House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer; Howard Berman, on the House Foreign Affairs Committee; and House Foreign Affairs chair Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

    ****************

    As one who see's the horrible Zionist agenda on-going in America....

    Can I scream: May Day! May Day!...we are under attack!

    And---I thought we had no money to help Americans.......what is going on here??

    1. JSChams profile image60
      JSChamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Ok.....wasn't that supposed to support a nation and not a religion and yes they need support.

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Americans need support, and your team says we can't afford it.

        1. JSChams profile image60
          JSChamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Hah! Your team won't do it so the ones who need it will have to look to them for it but they damn well better vote for your team isn't that right?

          Slaves is what the left has made them.

          1. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Some people have no clue what they're talking about. Have you noticed? My right ear is ringing.

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Ringing ears means someone is talking about you, or maybe a loud noise happened nearby like a fire truck siren. Maybe you ear is ringing from the siren of the ambulance that took you to the loony farm

              1. lovemychris profile image78
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Personal attack AV...good thing I'm not an R, or you'd be reported.

                1. American View profile image61
                  American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Typical left response, whine, cry, spin, deflect, blame others, whatever.

                  If you think that was an attack, then report me.

                  1. lovemychris profile image78
                    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    It was an attack: But I have more class than you.

        2. habee profile image92
          habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Um, what about all the Dems who voted for it?

          1. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The Dems are trying to help Americans too. But both sides are beholden to AIPAC, and that suxz!

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      okay is typical the whole story is not being told.LMC wants everyone to believe the Republicans are trying to push something through against the Democrats please note the following from the Library of Congress on the history of the Bill.

      3/5/2012    Introduced in House
      5/9/2012    Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 411 - 2, 9 Present (Roll no. 225).
      5/10/2012    Referred to Senate committee: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

      Please take note of the vote of 411 yes 2 no, obviously almost everyone Republican and Democrat alike voted for this. Just because Eric Cantor was the sponsor doesn't mean there was some diabolical plot that LMC likes to always make, little Miss conspiracy

      Now as to the substance of the bill, here is the summary also from the Library of Congress:

      SUMMARY AS OF:
      5/9/2012
      United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012 - Expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should take specified actions to assist in Israel's defense.

      States that is U.S. policy to: (1) help Israel preserve its qualitative military edge amid regional political transformation, and (2) encourage further development of advanced technology programs between the United States and Israel.

      Directs the President to report to Congress on: (1) the status of Israel's qualitative military edge in light of current regional trends and instability; (2) actions to improve the process relating to Israel's purchase and receipt of F-35 aircraft; (3) efforts to expand cooperation between the United States and Israel in homeland security, counter-terrorism, maritime security, energy, cyber security, and other appropriate areas; and (4) actions to integrate Israel into the defense of the Eastern Mediterranean.

      Amends the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, as amended, to extend authority for loan guarantees to Israel through September 30, 2015.

      Hmmm, it seems the bills is not quite the same as as LMC and that link she provided.

      1. swordsbane profile image61
        swordsbaneposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Almost all of Congress voted for it.  Then is CAN'T be good.

    3. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Wow. Where did you find this, Der Sturmer?

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        It's the truth...time we admit it! Why are we the only nation in the world to vote in  Israel's favor----allowing the illegal settlements?

        Allowing the nuclear weapons that no one in the Middle East is supposed to have?

        1. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          "Judaic infiltration"? You constantly use inflammatory and Nazi-era language about Jews, LMC. Not Israelis, Jews.

          1. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Which religion does Bibi practice? Which do the settlers?

            They are the problem. The far right in Israel, as the far right every where else. What should it be called?

            Likudists? Settlers? What?

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              LMC

              So are you saying that the Jewish religion is the only religion in Israel?
              is that why you're so against the Jews?

              1. lovemychris profile image78
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The Jews in power over there are racist brutal occupiers....shall I admire them?

                1. American View profile image61
                  American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  So you could not answer the question, figured

                  1. lovemychris profile image78
                    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I don't owe you anything.You never answer anything, and you insult and degrade. Seeyah.

          2. Josak profile image60
            Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            No I think the point here is not Jews but Zionists, many Zionists aren't even practicing Jews and many Jews are anti Zionist the point is simply that Israel is violating international law, human rights and the Geneva convention almost constantly and the US is supporting them, part of that is because of the strong Zionist lobby in the US, so the problem here is simply a definitional one, it's not Judaic infiltration, Zionist infiltration is more on the right track. It's a pretty sad tactic to fall back on Nazism whenever anyone criticizes a Jewish state or their supporters.

            1. livelonger profile image90
              livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              What do you mean by that? "Judaic infiltration of the government" was one of the very common charges made by Nazi era propagandists to gin up the people and get support for the "final solution." If someone doesn't think Israeli, Zionist, and Jewish are all the same thing, why would they say that?

              1. bgamall profile image85
                bgamallposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Livelonger, you are making a very big mistake. Zionism is not a race, it is a political movement. My natural father was Jewish and I am adopted, but Zionism is simply not a race, it is a wicked and evil movement by the elite to control the world in a New World Order.

                No one should condemn any race as a whole for ANYTHING. But we are being prevented from understanding the significance of Zionism by a media that is dedicated to Zionism. I am opening this thread because it has merit if people use the correct terms to take out the moral advantage Zionism reserves for itself.

                Zionism is two faced. It claims to be religious but commits war crimes. It claims to be the home of Judaism but many Jews hate Zionism. It is a doctrine of continual war, regime change, and occupation in the middle east, as well as a doctrine of war profiteering for the richest Zionists in the UK, US, Switzerland, etc.

                Zionism wants war, and wants the US to fight the war. Zionism wants to make the decisions in the world, and Ben-Gurion, the father of Israel, was an atheist, yet he wanted a world court to be located in Jerusalem. If you don't want to answer to a world court in Jerusalem, I suggest you pay attention to what we are saying.

            2. lovemychris profile image78
              lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Wasting YOUR time Josak. Any going against Israel is automatic anti-Semitism.

              You are not allowed to hate what Bibi adm is doing without hating all Jews for all time. That's how they get away with it here.

              A former Israeli leader even said so!
              http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2010/01/ … i-semitic/

              She said: In Europe, if you question Israel, they bring up the Holocaust. In America, they call you an anti-Semite.

              I have tried til I'm blue in the face to yell: Zionism! Likud! Bibi!.....but every single time, I'm told I hate all Jews.

              1. gabgirl12 profile image59
                gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I have to agree with this. The same goes anyone who speaks out against 'religion'. Religions will say they are being 'persecuted' as if  the words of a single person will begin an automatic 'barbaric' movement against them.

                The good and bad guy syndrome. It makes people willfully ignorant of why someone else feels the way they do.

                Israel combines religion and race with their government. They have perfected the art of 'identity'.

                Islam does the same thing. They have more in common with each other but the reason Islamic countries have grown is they don't deny or reject 'converts'. Once you become a Muslim you are an automatic 'citizen'. 

                The only negative on Islam is that of 'religious extremism'. It doesn't affect them however because they are numerous. But say that about Israel, and what comes to mind is 'how few they are', 'how they have been persecuted', etc etc etc. It's just a mind game. But at the same time if you convert to Judaism you are still not part of Judaism because you don't have a heritage by blood, only by practice.

                I wouldn't go as far as using the antiquated vocabulary, but I can understand the psychology involved in Judaism is meant to condemn the world. The same goes for Christianity and Islam.

                1. livelonger profile image90
                  livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Wrong.

                  Also wrong.

                  1. gabgirl12 profile image59
                    gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    How is that wrong?

                  2. gabgirl12 profile image59
                    gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I can't wait to read this argument. smile

              2. American View profile image61
                American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The being persecuted argument is getting quite old. If you speak out against religion your one thing, if you speak for religion is something else. If you speak out against Obama, your racist. When people don't agree with with someone, they spin it into" I'm being attacked or I get blamed for something" take pity on me"

                As far as I'm concerned pity party should be over. When someone makes a comment stand up and take responsibility, be able to take criticism as quickly as one gives it,

                1. gabgirl12 profile image59
                  gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Amen. smile

        2. MizBejabbers profile image92
          MizBejabbersposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Why are we the only nation in the world to vote for Israel?

          I was told by an ex-CIA agent that it was because Israel has the Mossad, and that they are the only spies we have in the middle East. I'm not stating this as fact, but as an idea to be considered.

          1. gabgirl12 profile image59
            gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            whoa..

      2. American View profile image61
        American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        LL,

        I do believe it says in the comments from the Library of Congress

        1. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I think the "Judaic infiltration" quote was added by Lovemychris. Sadly unsurprisingly.

          1. American View profile image61
            American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            LL,

            I know, she is in another thread crying right now that I am attacking her,even though I am not, and nobody is saying nothing about it. But she makes her comments that can offend like the one you pointed out and that's okay.

            1. lovemychris profile image78
              lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Ya said I escaped a loony farm: what is that, high praise?

              1. American View profile image61
                American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I never said you "escaped" the loony farm.

          2. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Wrong.

            1. livelonger profile image90
              livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Give me a link to where you got it, then. To be clear, it should say "Judaic infiltration" in your source.

              This should be interesting.

              1. lovemychris profile image78
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                It was an article by Brother Nathan, or Nathaniel...something. I got it off twitter, and I'm not going back to find it. Some of it was offensive, but the point is --what is going on here??

                1. livelonger profile image90
                  livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm glad you admit that "some of it was offensive." That's progress. Every Google search turns up antisemitic hate sites.

                  1. lovemychris profile image78
                    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I am not an anti-Semite. I am anti brutal military occupation.
                    Progress will be when you can admit that's what is going on, not anti-semitism.

    4. rhamson profile image77
      rhamsonposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Politics run amok is what the whole thing in Israel is about. Why is the US still involved in this mess? What is it that it garners so much concern on our part? The gut reaction is our lack of action regarding the Holocaust. We ignored Hitler's massacre of the Jews. It was a terrible thing we did in response to that genocide. Is it out of guilt that we establish a Jewish State in another's land? Many say that it was nobody's land and up for grabs. Somebody was living there and because they were given the "opportunity" to join with the Jews and they did not, it was okay to rule over them? The Palestinians are not a legal group to lay claim to the area some say. What about the outside Jewish group that came in and laid claim to the land? The Jews came from all over Europe and spoke many different languages beside Hebrew. How does that make them any more a legal group than the Palestinians?

      The American political system is tied to the money that flows from those who would like to keep America engaged in this mess in the Middle East. What is getting scary for the Jews is the Muslim influence that is starting to legally get heard in Congress with some Muslims getting elected.

      If we go back to the genocide element why are we not concerned about the ethnic cleansing in the East African Republic and what did we ever do to help Ruanda? Oh wait they don't have any money or anyone buying a vote from one of our congressmen.

      1. bgamall profile image85
        bgamallposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        We don't intervene for ethnic cleansing, except maybe Bosnia. I don't know if we have the resources to do so. I am tired of the US being the policeman of the world when we can't even fix Detroit or stop stupid political stunts like Sandy Hook Hoax. It is disgusting what America has become. It really is.

        Israel wants the US to fight wars for her. But it is time that dangerous commitment be put to rest.

        Now we have Bill HR4009 which is clearly a bad bill. It forbids Fed money to any organization that boycotts Israel. But the occupation will never end if we don't boycott Israel. That is all the world has left.

  2. aguasilver profile image89
    aguasilverposted 4 years ago

    Now maybe you begin to see why despite SOME of his policies, I support Ron Paul, because as a believer Paul could have easily voted to support this as it secures Israel from any attempt to decimation of the Jews, which is something a believer could view as good, but he rejected it upon constitutional grounds, hence he puts his integrity above his beliefs.

  3. peoplepower73 profile image89
    peoplepower73posted 4 years ago

    I wanted to see for myself if this is an actual bill and it is.  Below is the link to the bill, if you want to read it and track it's status. It will be interesting to see if it gets passed by the senate and the president.  The neocons are at it again. They are mainly made up of government officials with very strong ties to Israel.  They got us into Iraq and Afghanstan and now as we are winding down in the region, they want more protection. AIPAC (American Israeli Polictical Action Committee) is a very powerful group with a lot of money to spend on influencing government to their benefit. Here is the link:

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr4133

  4. twosheds1 profile image61
    twosheds1posted 4 years ago

    I took this post seriously until I saw the words "Zionist agenda." The US has always supported Israel, and this bill is simply an election-year ploy to garner the Jewish vote. Jews generally vote Democrat, though not overwhelmingly so, and I suspect that Cantor wanted his name on it to gain some votes.

    I don't think this is a Constitutional issue, because Israel is not part of the US, so the Constitution should not apply. The real problem is that religious belief on both sides have blinded them to the possibility that they might be able to share that God-forsaken pile of sand and rock they so cherish. The whole idea of a Jewish homeland I find kind of odd. It's as if I went back to Scotland and said "This is where my ancestors were from, so I'm taking it!" They'd make me into a haggis, and rightly so. However, if I went to Scotland and said "My ancestors were from here, and I'd like to move back and be a contributing member of your fine nation," they'd say "Welcome, laddy!"

    This has been the problem from day one. A Jewish state that doesn't allow equal citizenship for non-Jews was and is and will be a recipe for disaster, and US support to allow it to continue. A better solution would be to dissolve the State of Israel and make it a secular state that welcomes all, regardless of their ethnicity and religious views, just like this other country I'm thinking of...

    1. aguasilver profile image89
      aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      "My ancestors were from here, and I'd like to move back and be a contributing member of your fine nation,"

      Is a good approach, until the Scots decided that they wanted to wipe you off the face of the earth, then what would your reaction be?

      Israel IS a secular state and Arabs were offered citizenship:

      Arab citizens of Israel[2] are non-Jewish Israeli citizens whose cultural and linguistic heritage or ethnic identity is Arab.[3] The traditional vernacular of Arab citizens, irrespective of religion, is the Arabic language, or more precisely, the Palestinian dialect of Arabic. Most Arab citizens of Israel are functionally bilingual, their second language being Modern Hebrew. By religious affiliation, most are Muslim, particularly of the Sunni branch of Islam. There is a significant Arab Christian minority from various denominations as well as Druze, among other religious communities. Israeli Mizrahi Jews are not considered to form part of this population.

      According to Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics, the Arab population in 2010 was estimated at 1,573,000, representing 20.4% of the country's population.[4] The majority of these identify themselves as Arab or Palestinian by nationality and Israeli by citizenship.[5][6][7] Many have family ties to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as to Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. Negev Bedouins tend to identify more as Israelis than other Arab citizens of Israel.[8]

      Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since the Six-Day War of 1967, were offered Israeli citizenship, but refused, not wanting to recognize Israeli sovereignty. They became permanent residents.[9] They are entitled to municipal services and have municipal voting rights.[10

      1. twosheds1 profile image61
        twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        The difference is the Jews who first settled Israel in the 1920s didn't use the reasoned approach. It was closer to an invasion; a slow, stealthy invasion. And if Israel is a secular nation, what's that big symbol right in the middle of their flag?

        The Jews who moved into Israel pushed the Arabs out and made it a Jewish state. They didn't assimilate into the already-existing culture. It's akin to what whitey did to the Native Americans.

        1. gabgirl12 profile image59
          gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Secular does not mean Atheist, if thats what you are getting at with the Star of David.

        2. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Do you have any idea why Jews were flooding into Palestine in the early 20th century? Must have been those awfully nice beaches and those well-tended orchards and gardens.

          And when the UN created Israel and Palestine, what happened to the Jews living in Palestine (and other Arab lands)?

          The star of David in the flag doesn't mean you have to be religiously observant to be Jewish. Israel doesn't care, and neither do other countries when they treat Jews badly.

  5. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Why don't we move Israel here, to America?
    Since we're paying for her, supporting her unconditionally, comitting crimes right along with her......move her here.

    Pick a state Bibi can have, and the residents can move to another one.

    After all--our industrialists were more involved in the Holocaust than the Palestinians.....

    Make it right this time.....stop making Arabs pay for Nazi attrocities.
    **************

    And why should others recognize THEIR homeland as a Jewish state? Because Balfour declared it?

    Jews, Muslims an Christians all lived there before 1947....in peace. It does not belong to Israel just because Hertzel picked Palestine.

    IMHO

    1. JSChams profile image60
      JSChamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Well you need to take it up with the UN don't you? But that won't happen will it?

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      In Peace, LMAO

  6. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "A better solution would be to dissolve the State of Israel and make it a secular state that welcomes all, regardless of their ethnicity and religious views, just like this other country I'm thinking of..."

    Excellent idea!

    1. JSChams profile image60
      JSChamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      So they must give up their faith for whom? And why in the wide wide world of sports would anyone do that? Try that with Iran and don't you dare tell me their religion is not involved in their politics.

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Wasting your time JS

  7. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Not give up their faith...just share the land with the people they took it from.

    No one is stopping them from practicing their faith...but they are not acting in accord with it.
    Same as the Christians here.

    There are Jews in Iran....are there not?
    Are they in an outdoor prison? No.

    The idea was flawed from the beginning. Re-Boot. Start over. And it's my business, because my tax money goes there, and my name is on that prison wall.

    And how can any of you say that we can't help Americans, because we're broke? Why aren't you calling Bibi a lazy moocher, like you do your fellow citizens here??

    1. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      just share the land with the people they took it from.

      I think they should take some more.

      1. JSChams profile image60
        JSChamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        They will wail at us but will they take it up with the people who gave them back the land to start with? The UN? No.
        Why should they actually try and solve the problem when they can whine about it and try to tag Mitt Romney with it. The left never actually looks for viable answers. Just tax the rich and print money and attempt to stifle opposing opinion.
        If you are in favor of Israel you are now equated with Nazi's. Just like if you differ with Obama you are a racist. All must be smeared.

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Not for nothing, but I have to admit I spent a lot of hours last night researching this issue. As I have no faith do not believe in religion, honestly don't know much about the birth place of religions in such. All I know is that Jerusalem is considered the birthplace of Christianity, Judaism, and the Muslim faith. As I look at maps that I saw on Google going back to the ancient times, there our countries like the kingdom of Israel, the kingdom of Judah, the kingdom of Damascus, Assyrian Empire, Kingdom of Ammon. The map changes of course many times over the years. after World War II apparently the British came to control the territory and called it British Mandate for Palestine. They controlled all the people who lived there including but not limited to the Arabs and the Jews.

      The death of the al-Qassam in 1936 generated widespread outrage in the Arab community. Huge crowds accompanied Qassam's body to his grave in Haifa. A few months later, in April 1936, a spontaneous Arab national general strike broke out. The strike lasted until October 1936. During the summer of that year, thousands of Jewish-farmed acres and orchards were destroyed, Jewish civilians were attacked and killed, and some Jewish communities, such as those in Beisan and Acre, fled to safer areas. (Gilbert 1998, p. 80) The violence abated for about a year while the British sent the Peel Commission to investigate.
      By the time the Revolt concluded in March 1939, more than 5,000 Arabs, 400 Jews, and 200 Britons had been killed and at least 15,000 Arabs were wounded.[14] The Revolt resulted in the deaths of 5,000 Palestinian Arabs and the wounding of 10,000. In total, 10% of the adult Arab male population was killed, wounded, imprisoned, or exiled.(Khalidi 2001, p. 26) From 1936 to 1945, whilst establishing collaborative security arrangements with the Jewish Agency, the British confiscated 13,200 firearms from Arabs and 521 weapons from Jews.(Khalidi 1987, p. 845)

      The attacks on the Jewish population by Arabs had three lasting effects: First, they led to the formation and development of Jewish underground militias, primarily the Haganah, which were to prove decisive in 1948. Secondly, it became clear that the two communities could not be reconciled, and the idea of partition was born. Thirdly, the British responded to Arab opposition with the White Paper of 1939, which severely restricted Jewish land purchase and immigration. However, with the advent of World War II, even this reduced immigration quota was not reached. The White Paper policy also radicalised segments of the Jewish population, who after the war would no longer cooperate with the British.
      The name given to the Mandate's territory was "Palestine", in accordance with European traditions. The term Palestine was coined in the Western culture from the name of Palaestina province of the Roman (Syria-Palaestina) and later Byzantine Empire (Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Secunda). The Mandate charter stipulated that Mandatory Palestine would have three official languages, namely English, Arabic and Hebrew. It was not a country, it was a mandate

      in 1948 began the war for independence. The war was preceded by a period of civil war in the territory of the British Mandate of Palestine between Jewish Yishuv forces and Palestinian Arab forces in response to the UN Partition Plan. An alliance of Arab States intervened on the Palestinian side, turning the civil war into a war between sovereign states.[13] The fighting took place mostly on the former territory of the British Mandate and for a short time also in the Sinai Peninsula and southern Lebanon.[14] The war concluded with the 1949 Armistice Agreements, which established Armistice Demarcation Lines between Israeli and Arab military forces, commonly known as the Green Line.

      So one could say basically that the war was fought so that Israel could get its independence from Britain, sort of like the United States did.

      So Israel gets independence on the land that history shows on these maps was theirs to start with. The Palestinians, the PLO, a terrorist organization wants Israel to give up the land because the PLO claims it's theirs. Honestly I have not seen a map or read anywhere that said that land was theirs.

      I may be wrong with that I have read and research so far, or perhaps all those maps are wrong to, if so show me where I'm wrong. This from where I sit now I change my mind as to whether or not the Palestinians were entitled to a statehood. I once agreed but now I don't see why you do terrorists land to create a state that wasn't theirs in the first place.

      I am open to intelligent discussion on this. I don't want have baked opinions, or misguided innuendo. This subject has now truly piqued my curiosity and would love to hear others' input

      1. livelonger profile image90
        livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I think any argument that says one of the two groups needs to leave, because they don't belong there, is humane. I've heard arguments from partisans on this issue that the Jews are foreign transplants and should leave, and that the Arabs are foreign transplants (from Egypt and Jordan) and should leave. As if kicking millions of people out of their homes were a good idea and that would bring lasting peace to the region.

        I personally believe they should have their own states, share Jerusalem (west to Israel, east to Palestine, with the Old City under UN protection), based on 1967 borders. Israel should dismantle all settlements in Palestinian territory, and Palestine needs to recognize Israel's right to exist.

        1. gabgirl12 profile image59
          gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Explaining a reasonable solution to countries where religions rule their heads  is pointless. (..the heart ruling the head?) They only call it peace when you accept their demands. They are children. They don't want to share because both sides are fighting to 'win', like little children. Even if they were to do what livelonger said, their mentality is that it would be a 'loss'. But what has been lost has been what should have mattered the most to both countries: the People.

        2. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          LL,

          I agree with you that it should come down to two groups arguing who should stay and who should go. Both groups obviously have long ties to the region based on their religions. The one thing I keep going back to is there was no country for the PLO. Basically that land was kind of open land, like the United States was when the pilgrims first got here. Prior to that it was just the Indian tribes that roamed the nation. I kind of see that may have been how was years ago in the Middle East. Even though the was a kingdom of Israel, it really wasn't a state, or a country, it was kind of a territory that everybody roamed across. But there was a recognition of an existence of Israel on these maps, they fought for their own independence, kind of like the United States did. So how do the Palestinians lay claim that the Israel's took a country from them?

          If I'm understanding this correctly and basically they both just roamed the land, sort of like the Indian tribes did here, the why doesn't Israel break down and create states like the United States did, we start his colonies became states. Israel could do the same, the Palestinians to live in whatever state they want, run for governor, mayor whatever, the Jews can do the same, and that of course they can elect the president. Maybe that's a naïve way of looking at it but it seems to me it's better love what they're doing now

          1. livelonger profile image90
            livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I think you meant that it shouldn't come down to one group staying and one group leaving, right? I think the federation idea is OK, although a question becomes who controls the federation. Would a Palestinian leadership abrogate Israel's right of return? I think it's easier to just have two separate states that respect each other's right to exist. Both sides will have to rein in extremists who insist only they are entitled to the land.

            I think there are far more differences between the Israel and Palestine with respect to culture, values, religion, and language, than there are between the various US states. Denmark and Norway remain separate countries, as do Thailand and Laos, and the Czech Republic and Slovakia, even though those countries' peoples are far closer with respect to language, religion, and culture.

            Maybe one day when mankind is more advanced, the concept of national borders will be meaningless. We're not there yet.

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              LL,

              You are right, it was a typo sort of, should not is what it should have said. I am using that voice software Dragon for about a week now and I'm still getting used to it.

              You have a good point about two separate countries, but I kind of see a war between the two in the future, one will take over the other and we would be back at square one.

              You're right happened one day mankind will be more advanced

              1. livelonger profile image90
                livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                That could happen, unfortunately.

                Another possibility is that with Israel creating more and more settlements, the Palestinians decide they don't want their own state and would rather be fully-enfranchised Israeli citizens (a single state). Then either the Palestinians within a few generations become the majority and change all the laws, or, to keep up the demographic battle, the ultra-Orthodox Jews make up the bulk of the population growth, and Israel becomes a low-innovation, uneducated third world country.

  8. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Roseanne Barr‏

    http://www.arava.org/ "This is my solution to the problems in the Middle East-explained well here. I have been involved in this idea 4 years"

    Rosanne is a proud Jewish woman who claims to be of the blood-line of David. If you recall, she was the 1st "celebrity" to join Kabbahla (sp).

    Make fun, laugh...but this is  good idea!

    1. Jean Bakula profile image97
      Jean Bakulaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I don't have any disrespect for Jewish people, and realize they have had much struggle. But so have many other peoples. Stalin killed about 20 million Russians, and you don't hear about that constantly. The US should be protecting it's own first, especially when we have starving children, homeless people, and sick people who are dying before they can afford health care. There's that old saying, "Charity begins at home."

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I agree!

    2. JSChams profile image60
      JSChamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Rosanne Barr?

      Yeah there's someone with lot's of common sense.

  9. maxoxam41 profile image80
    maxoxam41posted 4 years ago

    It is clear that the U.S. policy in the Middle-Eastern affairs is deeper than to secure its people to live in democracies. After the thievery of the oil in Libya and Iraq, after the fomenting of the insurrection on the Syrian scene, the bill will give Israel and the U.S. the freedom to tandem in an action against any Middle-Eastern country. If for whatever reason Israel feels offended. Israel and the U.S. will be partners in a military intervention. And the worst, to their eyes, any action will be justified. If I were Iran, I would start worrying and develop stronger alliances with China.

  10. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    What? My OP said only 2 members voted against it....and it named the sponsors: 2 dems and 2 repubs...how is that me saying it's all Republicans? Geeesh with the smears av!

    Eric Cantor has said he wants aid to Israel a permanent part of Our budget. 330 members of our gvt have vowed to support Israel no matter what they do....

    This is not right. And if it was any other country---you all would have a fit!

    And what they are doing to Palestinians is criminal, and none of you care. Nor does anyone in our gvt.

    Yet--we're supposed to ignore it because of 60 years ago....I'm looking at the here and now. Israel is the brutal military occupier--and we are too, by proxy and by monetary support.

    I object!

    1. peoplepower73 profile image89
      peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Your are wrong.  I do care about the Palestinians.  I belive the Israelis are the biggest terrorists in the world.  They push down people's houses with bulldozers and make refugees out of them.  Bebe is pushing for a  program called Transport, where he wants all Palestinians to be transported to another country. What an irony, it sound like what the NAZI's did to them!

      1. livelonger profile image90
        livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Israelis are the biggest terrorists in the world? You really can't think of any other regime on the planet that has inflicted more violence?

        And Israel is treating the Palestinians the same way Nazis treated Jews? Do you really believe that?

        I'm not saying Israeli conduct is exemplary, but to paint it as the world's worst by any measure is beyond ridiculous.

      2. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Exactly.

        Zionist = Nazi.  IMO

  11. peoplepower73 profile image89
    peoplepower73posted 4 years ago

    There are different types of terrorism.  How would you like to have your house pushed down by a bulldozer and then re-built into someone eleses house?  I take it you have never seen the pictures of Palestinian refugees with nothing but suit cases holding their belongings.  What do you think the settlements are?  This started in 1948 and is still going on today.

    Have you seen the walls that keep the Palestinians coralled in their sectors?  Sure it's to protect the Israelis from attack,  But it's the same as Nazi gettos that were used against the Jews. If they want to travel into Israel, they have to go through many time consuming and tedious check points.

    It's only been in recent history that the Palestinans use modern weapons. The Palestinans used rocks and molitov cocktials to defend themselves from modern weapons that we supplied  to Israel, including fighter planes. Google Earth Israel and look at how the Jewish settlements are encroaching on Palistinian territory.  Put yourself in their shoes. Do some research on their conflict and see what you come up with.

    1. lovemychris profile image78
      lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      watch these videos:

      The Iron Wall

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSPatKNo-3Q

      Occupation 101_avi

      http://stagevu.com/video/rvcqdpuiycfj

      Israeli soldiers speak out:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcBRWv9sPus

      Very past time we stop denying the truth. And we have the obligation, since it's done in our name!

    2. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The problem is that far too many people are inclined to sanctify one side and demonize the other in this conflict.

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Right...we sanctify Israel, and demonize Arabs.

        1. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Demonize Arabs..... Hate speech ?

      2. gabgirl12 profile image59
        gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Such is the price paid for ignorance and the neglect to take the time to learn about all sides before judging.

        1. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I think the ignorance is willful. There are lots of reasons (religion, islamophobia and antisemitism, primarily) that make people want to deify one side and make the other side the absolute baddest, worstest, violentist, terroristest, deadliest regime the world has ever seen.

          1. Josak profile image60
            Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I am none of the above but I see the issue as pretty clear cut, it's called an understanding of justice and international law.

            1. livelonger profile image90
              livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I don't see it as clear cut at all, but agree it's about justice.

              Why it animates people more than much, much more violent conflicts where hundreds of times as many people are getting killed, though, is down to either religion, islamophobia, or antisemitism, though, in my opinion.

              1. Josak profile image60
                Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I think why it animates people in the US more is because we are paying for it.

                1. livelonger profile image90
                  livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  We tend to be involved in lots of military conflicts since we sell weapons. Often to both sides.

                  We are also supporting both sides of this conflict.

                  1. Josak profile image60
                    Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I don't believe we should, I am an isolationist and we are not supporting both sides equally, the only reason Israel is able to terrorize the region is because they have our backing and weapons. For example we gave white phosphorous weapons to Israel which they then promptly used against civilians and/or in civilian areas, I have seen what that stuff does personally, yeah it animates me.

          2. gabgirl12 profile image59
            gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Agreed, ignorance is willfull.

            They want to make them look bad, because in making them look bad, they make themselves look good. They don't even see the mistakes they make. And it helps them to cement their beliefs...maybe they do it to make keep their 'faith' alive. It always revives itself when it has something to fight for...or against. If that makes any sense.

            1. livelonger profile image90
              livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Yes, it does. Sad that most are doing so by proxy, though, not having any skin in the game, so to speak. Meanwhile, many more multiples of people are getting killed elsewhere, and no one cares.

              1. peoplepower73 profile image89
                peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                gabgirl12, livelonger, josak:  Did any of you people even look at the links from lovemychris? Or are you just passing judgement on what you believe the situation is.  The rest of the world knows what is going on in this conflct.  It's just most of the people in this country have not been given all the information because the Jewish movement does not want the hand that gives them 30 billion a year to be jeopardized.  If you do the research, you will find that every terrorists attack that we have had in this country is because of the preferential treatment that we give to the Israelis compared to the Palestinians. There is a common thread from Sirhan Sirhan, the attack on the Cole, PanAm flight 103, right up to 9-11.  That's what this forum is about, not that there is more violence in the rest of the world. Whenever a society or a culture is treated less than human, it is immoral and that is what is happening to the Palestinians. Because, the Israelis believe that God gave them that land and the Palestinians do not belong there becaues of what God told them 2, 000 years ago. So the Israeli's job is to settle into what they believe is their god-given right no matter how many Palestians are displaced or killed or imprisoned. And we pay the price for it.  When our government says that Iran, Iraq, and Afgrhanastan are a threat to their neighbors, who do you think they are talking about?  it certainly isn't the Arab countries...and who do you think we protect?

                And I do care about the people who are being killed in Darfur, the Congo and rest of the world, but you are right we don't have any skin their games.

                1. livelonger profile image90
                  livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Lovemychris has posted fabricated quotes so her credibility is shot with me. And given your last sentence of what I quoted above, I'd say you are, too.

                  1. Josak profile image60
                    Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    You are taking offense to the Jewish comment, it's not an insult, the movement is almost entirely Jewish though they should be saying Zionist, I sincerely doubt that any of them are anti-Semitic, you are just enforcing political correctness.

                  2. peoplepower73 profile image89
                    peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Livelonger: What in my last sentence are you taking offense to?  Josak:  You are right.  Some of my best friends are Jews, but that does not make me sympathetic with the Zionist movement. I like to do the research and drill down to the root cause of the problem.  It actually started with the British when they pulled out of the mid-east and granted state-hood to the Jews as a result of the Balfour Declaration of 1917.  Here is that declaration:

                    "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

                  3. lovemychris profile image78
                    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Name one?

        2. lovemychris profile image78
          lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          We've had 60 years....how much time do we need?

    3. crazyhorsesghost profile image85
      crazyhorsesghostposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Did you forget the six day war when Syria , Jordan , and Egypt attacked Israel and were beaten back.

      Israel has to do what it does to survive.

      The Arabs especially the militants want to destroy the USA and Israel.

      That is their goal plain and simple.

      Look at Iran. That is what we have to look forward to. I say Iran's present government should not be allowed to exist.

  12. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago
  13. Dr Billy Kidd profile image91
    Dr Billy Kiddposted 4 years ago

    Totally crazy and without foundation. Don't those idiots in Congress know that half of the Israeli population is not committed to Israel as a Jewish state. They simply want a secular democracy.

  14. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "We are now holding strong proof that Romney and “Bain Capital” are agents of the State of Israel who is attempting to rig an American election on behalf of a group of European entities unfriendly to the continued freedoms left to the American people.

    Mitt Romney is, in fact, a clear and present danger to the United States.  Chris Bollyn has stated the following, and I find Chris a credible source:

    ROMNEY’S ISRAELI HANDLER – Orit Gadiesh, former “War Room” assistant to Ezer Weizman and Moshe Dayan, is the daughter of Israeli Brigadier General Falk Gadiesh (born Falk Gruenfeld, Berlin, 1921) and his Ukrainian-born wife. Gadiesh is chairman of the management consulting firm Bain & Company, the parent company of Bain Capital, and was the company’s managing director under CEO Mitt Romney in 1992. “She’s like a Jewish mother figure to many of the people at Bain,” ex-Bainie Dan Quinn told Fortune magazine in 1996.

    Bain Capital owns Clear Channel, the largest radio station group owner in the United States. Clear Channel owns the networks which air the most popular radio talk shows, including The Rush Limbaugh Show, The Glenn Beck Program, The Sean Hannity Show, America Now with Andy Dean, Coast to Coast AM, The Savage Nation, The Mark Levin Show, and The Dave Ramsey Show. (Graphic: “Rush Limbaugh Spills the Beans on the Jewish Conspiracy” by Pat Healy)

    Mitt Romney was a co-founder of Bain Capital along with Bill Bain, seen here. Bain was ousted in 1991 and Romney served as CEO of Bain & Company in 1991-1992. In May 1991, while Romney was CEO, Gadiesh was named chairman of the company’s Policy Committee, which set the company’s business strategy and policy. In 1992, under Romney, she became managing director. Orit Gadiesh, who has worked at Bain & Co. since 1977, became chairman of Bain & Co. in 1993.

    Orit Gadiesh, born in Israel in 1951, has worked closely with Mitt Romney since at least 1991, and probably much longer since she joined Bain & Company in 1977, when she was 26. Romney appointed Gadiesh to his transition team when he became governor of Massachusetts in November 2002. Gadiesh is the daughter of Falk Gadiesh, an Israeli brigadier general and former member of the general staff who reorganized the Israeli army in the early 1950s after a stint at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

    Falk’s daughter Orit was chosen to serve in Israeli military intelligence. Her first position in the Israeli military was as assistant to Ezer Weizman, the deputy chief of staff who later became president of Israel. During the early 1970s, she worked in the war room, a bunker where Gen. Moshe Dayan was in charge. As a war room assistant to Weizman, Orit provided military leaders with documents and correspondence.

    Prior to joining Bain & Company, Gadiesh served in the office of the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Israeli Army. Currently, she is on the board of directors of the Peres Center for Peace, an organization headed by a former chief of staff of the Israeli military, Lt. General Amnon Lipkin-Shahak. The high-level Mossadnik Avner Azulay, managing director of the Marc Rich Foundation, is also on the executive board of the Peres Center.

    ROMNEY’S INTELLIGENCE CHIEF AND CAMPAIGN ADVISER – Mitt Romney named Michael Chertoff, the Israeli agent who supervised the destruction of the crucial evidence of 9/11, co-chair of his counterterrorism and intelligence advisory committee in October 2011. The 9/11 cover-up continues.

    Mitt Romney attended the Mossad’s “Herzliya Conference on Israeli Security” in 2007. Romney and the current Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu worked together as consultants at the Boston Consulting Group early in their careers.

    Romney’s close relationship with Orit Gadiesh and Israeli military intelligence is the real reason he is the chosen candidate of the Zionist establishment. Romney is being supported by high-level Zionists, Israeli military intelligence, and their controlled media network. This relationship between the Israeli military and Mitt Romney, a presidential candidate, should be of great concern to all Americans because this is how the Israeli military plans to drag the United States into a war with Iran."


    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/06/09 … -ballgame/

    ***********

    May Day! May Day! We are under attack!!

    1. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      "Chris Bollyn has stated the following, and I find Chris a credible source"

      You would because his opinions are the same as your opinions, anti-Israel. As you read him he cannot hide the fact of his hatred for Jews and Israel, yeah real credible source

  15. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "When I watched Dubya lie, you could see he didn't know and didn't care. When you watch Romney, he KNOWS he's lying."

    1. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      When we watch Obama lie, he smiles and we could see he knows he's line. And when he walks away from his Teleprompter he smacks himself on the knee and says "damn I'm good at fooling these people"

  16. peoplepower73 profile image89
    peoplepower73posted 4 years ago

    Here is what wikipedia says about Bain Capital for openers. Lovemychris, you were right about Clear Channel Communications.

    Bain Capital is a Boston-headquartered alternative asset management and financial services company that specializes in private equity, venture capital, credit and public market investments. Bain invests across a broad range of industry sectors and geographic regions. As of the beginning of 2012, the firm manages approximately $66 billion of investor capital across its various investment platforms.

    The firm was founded in 1984 by partners from the consulting firm Bain & Company. Since inception it has invested in or acquired hundreds of companies including such notable companies as AMC Entertainment, Aspen Education Group, Brookstone, Burger King, Burlington Coat Factory, Clear Channel Communications, Domino's Pizza, DoubleClick, Dunkin' Donuts, D&M Holdings, Guitar Center, Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), Sealy, The Sports Authority, Staples, Toys "R" Us, Warner Music Group and The Weather Channel.

    1. JSChams profile image60
      JSChamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      You know...anyone can write anything they want and make it a Wikipedia article.
      I'm sure there are lots of facts there and I can tell this is a left motivated thing because you aren't supposed to make a profit in this world.
      As further regards Wikipedia, I have high school students in my house and when they do their work and reports of all kinds they are not always allowed to use Wikipedia just for the reasons I stated above. It's not a particularly reliable source of info. I never use it myself for facts.

      1. peoplepower73 profile image89
        peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Here is the link to their website.  Just go there and prove it to yourself.

        http://www.baincapital.com/

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      People,

      What is your point to the fact that a capitalist investment firm owns or has invested in companies? In fact, if nothing else your list of impressive companies that they own or invest in shows that Romney is very successful, economically smart, and has created tons of jobs. I think that's a great thing don't you?

      How does any of of that prove anything about the bogus statement from LMC? remember she said:

      ""We are now holding strong proof that Romney and “Bain Capital” are agents of the State of Israel who is attempting to rig an American election on behalf of a group of European entities unfriendly to the continued freedoms left to the American people.'

      How does any of what you posted show that Romney and Bain capital are agents of Israel. I cannot even come up with a word to describe how ridiculous that statement is.

      If you think Romney can somehow control the media because he is invested in clear media, then what is your response to the fact that more Democrats are heavily invested in media stations, such as CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, well I could go on but you get the point. I guess that means because they're invested in the media too, they must be agents of Israel. Unreal

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        No ones is aking you to believe anything.

        I am saying May Day! May Day!....before it's too late.

        You all, as usual, resort to insults and degrading put-downs.

        Go back to your Sharia thread....and tell us all what a threat Sharia is, and how you have the right to feel that way.

        But I do not have any right to warn of the danger I see.....because it's not polically correct to do so in America.

        Romney has been friends with Bibi since 1975. His 3rd in command at Bain was Mossad. He said he would consult Bibi before acting. Cantor wants to make aid to Israel a permanent part of our budget. AIPAC rules Congress. Israel is committing crimes aginst humanity and no one is supposed to speak--because they are the eternal victims.

        WRONG! They are NOW the perpetraitors of horror. Congratulations. The oppressed has become the oppressor, and the oppressors are just the same as those who oppressed them.

        Any thing to justify it, and make excuses.

        These Israeli's won't do it anymore...but I guess you know more than them too.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcBRWv9sPus

        1. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          LMC,

          You Said:

          "We are now holding strong proof that Romney and “Bain Capital” are agents of the State of Israel who is attempting to rig an American election on behalf of a group of European entities unfriendly to the continued freedoms left to the American people."

          You are making an accusation that you cannot substantiate and when people ask you to you resort to the victim angle. In this case you're saying that everyone is insulting and degrading you.

          here's your chance to prove us all wrong. Show us something legitimate that Romney is an agent for the state of Israel. While you do, you do realize the Jewish faith and the Mormon faith do not respect each other, there is no way the the Jewish state would allow Mormon to be an agent.

          1. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            "I" didn't say. The article I copied did......get it right will you please?

            How can I speak for them?

            I already told you my feelings on Israel....I'm not repeating it. Go back and look.

            I speak for me. When I use these: " ".....I'm copying and pasting someone else.

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              What a bogus excuse.

              1. lovemychris profile image78
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                How so? You are asking me to provide proof for someone else's claims. Read Veterans Today.

                And, it's sad that you are OK with Bibi being asked before Romney would make a decision....Bibi is NOT a US citizen!

                1. American View profile image61
                  American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  You just cannot help yourself keep spending can you. That's what's really sad, that you actually believe that

                  1. JSChams profile image60
                    JSChamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Oh you can spend and print all the money you like for all sorts of things.......except a voter ID.

                    big_smile

      2. peoplepower73 profile image89
        peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I copied and pasted the first two paragraphs from Wikipedia about Bain Capital. I was told by JSChams that wikipedia was not a reliable source.  So I went to Bain Capitals website and viewed the portfolio's  of all the different investment and strategy companies it has and found that the compainies listed in wikipedia were listed in those portfolios, nothing more, nothing less.  That is my point.  It has nothing to do with the connection to Israel, although I was hoping to find it.

        1. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks for clearing that up People

  17. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Ahhhhh, here it is: This was said to me in another thread:

    "So do you support rabid Islamo fascism? You sound like it."

    If you speak out on Israel----you are a Jew-hating anti-Semite, or a rabid Islamo fascist supporter.

    But it's ok to hate Islam, Muslims, Arabs.....in fact, it's Patriotic!

    This is how they try and shut you up....well go for it. They can't shut all people up. -Though they try.

    Actions speak louder than words. By their deeds shall you know them.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Poncing around an Internet discussion forum using a fake name and avatar? By their deeds you shall know them huh? lol

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I have had some dealings with Hasbarats....the way I know is they are extremely vicious in their attacks.

        Like you can say something about a public figure, and they come at you.

        Have also had dealings with police officers on the internet....found the same tactics to be true.

        Always demand answers, but never give them.

        Pretty unpleasant characters.

      2. American View profile image61
        American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Very true Mark, very true. It does speak volumes

  18. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Mitt and Bibi are friends. Mitt had an Israeli woman as co-worker....why would they not allow him to be an agent?

    1. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      LMC,

      I had a black person in my Engine company, I had a Spanish person in my Engine Company, they were my co workers. So by your train of thought, I am an agent of Africa and Spain. Are you for real

  19. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    By Philip Giraldi
    The Passionate Attachment
    April 12, 2012

    "One of the more outrageous articles to appear recently describes how likely Republican Party presidential nominee Mitt Romney and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu enjoy a close personal relationship based on their simultaneous employment at the Boston Consulting Group in 1976. The article also explains how that relationship has continued, with Netanyahu briefing Romney on the subject of Iran before the March Super Tuesday primaries. Earlier, in December, Romney criticized Newt Gingrich over a comment about Palestinians, asserting that “Before I made a statement of that nature, I’d get on the phone to my friend Bibi Netanyahu and say ‘Would it help if I say this? What would you like me to do?’”

    It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Romney is handing the exercise of US foreign policy on the Middle East over to Israel. And it also doesn’t take any particular insight to realize that if a foreign head of state is advising a presidential candidate on foreign policy in any context it is completely unacceptable interference in the domestic politics of the United States. So why isn’t the media screaming in outrage? Well, the usual reason: that Israel is untouchable.

    As loathsome as Obama has been in his craven surrender to Israeli interests, there has always been to the saving grace that one knows deep down that the president despises Netanyahu even as he fears him and the power of the Israel Lobby. Not so with Mitt, who will be an enthusiastic puppet in whatever game the Israelis decide to play."

    Philip Giraldi is the executive director of the Council for the National Interest and a recognized authority on international security and counterterrorism issues.

  20. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Care to discuss the Giraldi opinion? Or is LMC-bashing the only thing you do?

    1. gabgirl12 profile image59
      gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I think its the bashing. They are not in agreement with the adjectives you are using, nor do they believe you are credible.

      I asked a question of livelonger and he did not respond as to why he thought I was wrong in my post which was in agreement with you on a few points concerning religion. I don't understand nor have I read the sites you posted. I'm also not looking to be swayed in any direction as I have my own reasons for being on these forums. Mainly to get information and as much input as possible with a clear informed view because I am opposed to organized religion...period.

      I would have appreciated a response from livelonger as he has quite a bit of valuable information. He's also Jason Menayan the director of marketing of these pages.

      I read a bit of what you said and I can only agree that anything that breaks the first amendment needs to end. But I'm not sure if what you are arguing falls within the Constitutional amendment or foreign policy.

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I just think it's WRONG to be beholden to anyone other than your own fellow citizens.

        Another country should not direct our policy.

        If I said I want the ayatollah to be consulted before our president acts....then you'd hear it!

        1. gabgirl12 profile image59
          gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          beholden?

          1. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Yes. I think our gvt is beholden to AIPAC.

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              LMC,

              Prove why you think our gvt is beholden to AIPAC. Show a credible source, not someones opinion.Otherwise all you are doing is thinking what someones is thinking and that does not make it a fact

              1. lovemychris profile image78
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Man--I have been living here since 1960...I don't have to prove anything. I can feel how I feel wthout justifying it to you.

                Why don't YOU prove Obama wasn't born here?

                But if you want a recent example...it's when Obama and Hilary both announced they were running for prez. Where's the 1st place both of them went running to give a speech?

                AIPAC.

                When Rubio was elected--THAT night, he went to Israel to see Bibi.

                Netenyahu gives a speech here, and he gets a million standing O's.....Obama gives a speech, and nothing. OUR prez doesn't get adoration, but a foreign leader does???

                Something wrong with that picture.

                1. gabgirl12 profile image59
                  gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  It sounds more like 'moral' support than government backing.

                  1. lovemychris profile image78
                    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Do you know how many of our leaders are Zionists? A lot. And Adelson is big time, as is Koch.

                    Read the writing on the wall...As Helen Thomas and Rick Sanchez found out--you cannot criticize Israel in America.

                2. American View profile image61
                  American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Gabgirl gets it. It indeed was for morals support and not government backing. We have had numerous leaders of other countries come here and get standing ovations, does that mean Romney's an agent for all those countries too?

                  I don't know why LMC puts such a big deal on the Jewish vote. Anybody can win election without Jewish vote. The Jewish vote only represents just under 2% of the voting population. It's kind of like the unions, people give the unions so much credit for power when in reality they're only 6% of the entire work force.

                  1. livelonger profile image90
                    livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Bingo. Outside certain districts in New York and Florida, Jews are not large enough of a population to have much of an electoral impact.

                    What LMC and many others don't want to acknowledge, since it doesn't fit neatly into their conspiracy theories, is that plenty of evangelical Christians, who outnumber Jews about 20 to 1, like their polticians to slavishly praise and support Israel. They are electorally significant, to say the least.

                  2. lovemychris profile image78
                    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Soooooo, OUR president deserves no moral support, but Bibi does?

                    Something wrong with that picture.

                    And how come Obama and Hilary both went straight to AIPAC?

                    They didn't go to the Swedish embassy.....nor the Spanish one....why AIPAC, if they're so un-important?

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      LMC,

      You answered your own question when you stated "discuss the Giraldi opinion." Opinion, not fact. Here is the problem, you cite sources of opinion and try to pass them off as fact. You made a statement of fact that Romney is an Israeli agent, I ask for proof aqnd you come back with someones opinion and admit it was someones opinion. So when we disagree with you you claim we are bashing you. You do know the difference between disagreeing and bashing, don't you?

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Oh My GOD>>>>>>, does every article sited here on HP mean it's fact? No! People know an article is an opinion piece. It's not a history paper for crying out loud. I did not claim anything! I copied an article with a man's opinion. Just as when YOU say you know Obama wasn't born here....do people come at you and say stop saying that as fact AV? No--they know it is your opinion. STOP laying all these orders on me that don't apply to anyone else...yourself included!

        That being said: I do believe RMoney is a treachorous man, and I do believe Duff, Bollen and Mars have the goods on him. And that is my perogative, just as you believe Obama wasn't born here.

        And you keep your beliefs while accusing me of living on a loony farm. That's some nerve.

        1. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          LMC,

          People have asked me what I base my opinion on Obama and I have shown it, even to you. You just choose to ignore it so then you say I'm just getting an opinion without backing it up.

          Again you keep saying Romney is a treacherous man and saying you know it for a fact. You even claimed to get an e-mail that had national security implications, and you expect us to just believe you.

          There are many people on these forums who give their opinion intelligently without hatred and back it up. I still may not agree with them but they presented their case well. You go off and then tried to play the pity game, "oh they're all bashing me" when in reality were not bashing we just disagree.

          Now, if you want to believe that Duff, Bolan, Mars opinions about Romney who are free to do so. Don't make a statement trying to pass it off as a fact when you are basing your opinion on somebody else's opinion. As I said before you don't seem to realize you're doing that.

          And by the way, show me where I have been giving you orders to do anything.

          1. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            It's like a brick wall....Tell you what:

            I'll answer your demands when you do the same:

            1. Where is the source that Obama gave Barett $10,000,000?

            2. Where is the proof Obama was not born here?

            "Again you keep saying Romney is a treacherous man and saying you know it for a fact."
            WRONG! I am stating my opinion! Stop bashing me!


            And stop telling me hatred backs me up. And stop calling me a whiner, and a pity-party. Just Stop. Where are your manners?

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              LMC,

              Show me where I said hatred back you up, show me where I'm bashing you, I've asked before and he has not shown quite simply because I'm not. As I said earlier just because I disagree with you that is not bashing. And because you claim on bashing that is where the pity party starts. You are the one saying "everybody look at me, he is bashing me." I haven't said no such thing. You were the one who on another thread got upset when others were agreeing with my you then turned around and said something along the lines that I was bashing you and everybody else was okay with it, and you felt like you were being ganged up on because the others were disagreeing with you.

              As for the proof it's been provided to you many times before in different threads. I have the time to waste with you going over the same old things because you refuse to acknowledge it. You don't have to agree with it, but you should acknowledge it. Where are your manners

              1. lovemychris profile image78
                lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Nope...you never answer, and neither will I. Bash me from afar, like usual.

                1. American View profile image61
                  American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  See, Spin Spin Spin, Poor Me

                  1. lovemychris profile image78
                    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Get off this thread av, if you don't want to be reported. I'v taken enough of your bashing.
                    Start your own thread to show your research and I will leave yours alone.

  21. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    And thank you for acknowledging the bashing.

    1. gabgirl12 profile image59
      gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      You're welcome.

  22. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    I'm not crying. I don't like them. Koch is personal...what's your beef with Soros?

    Do you think you could talk JUST ONCE without insulting adjectives?
    It's a tactic of hasbara and gvt stooge officers to use them...are you one of them?

    Heard it a lot when I was alarmed at the rising cost of living in 03. And when I defended a man who was framed for murder.

    It's a smear tactic. And your constant use of it makes me suspicious of you. Big time.

    1. gabgirl12 profile image59
      gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It's unfortunate that 'respect' is also aligned with taking a person seriously. As I've been following this forum, I'm not sure who is serious and who isn't.

      I read this bit on hasbara.

      http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/jonatho … rolls.html

      Is this what is happening on this thread???

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        These 2 apply here, I think:

        2.Guilt by association, they point to some source your are linked to as being anti-semitic or neo-nazi.

        4.Smears and insults - if the top 3 fail then it's just character assassination.

        But there is also a site which lists the things to say to people you are harrassing....

        and "whine" and "live in a basement" are on that list....Both of which have been said here...the whining one, in particular many times.

        It's politics of personal destruction...which they have been doing to Obama since long before he was elected.

        "He's not like ""US""."
        He doesn't ""act" American.

        The Other The Other The Other.

        It's creepy as all heck, and they are too.

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      LMC,

      Spin Spin Spin, again you try to deflect and play the "i am under attack" card. It is so old, be responsible for once with what you say.

      You attack Koch despite the fact what pisses you off about them , Soros is doing only 5 times more of it, and he is your Hero. No smear, fact Do you not see the hypocracy in that?

  23. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    If someone speaks their opinon, don't say the are whining- how's that?

    There are words that people are trained to use when gang-stalking people. Whining is one of them.

    Debate, without personal insults...how's that? When a person posts an article...those are the writer of the article's words...don't say "LMC says".

    Let's HAVE debate, without smears.
    Here is one I agree with:

    --Veterans Today‏

    Vladimir Putin Nemesis of the New World Order http://bit.ly/KZxyYW--

    discuss, or insult me?
    and Brother Nathaniels is in this one too....what a coincedence!

  24. peoplepower73 profile image89
    peoplepower73posted 4 years ago

    I think most of you are missing the point.  This forum is about the bill.  It's not about whether Israel is good or bad.  It's about our country helping to enhance their military defenses by guaranteeing them more money and F35 jets until 2015. What's missing in this discussion is empathy for the Palestinians.  They have no representation here.  Has anyone besides me and LMC tried to put themselves in the place of what those people have gone through for decades and are still going through today?  Do you think they could pass a bill like the one that Israel passed through the House? I don't care how you slice it, the settlements have been and continue to be squeezing the Palestinans out of their houses and land.  If we were in agreement with this plan, why do we have peace talks and try to convince the Israelis to stop the settlements?  But Bibi uses passive resistants to continue the settlements, no matter what kinds of peace talks our country has had and continues to have.  And isn't it interesting, they always fail! Why because the Israelis impose untenable conditions on the Palestians and then blame them for terroism and being uncooperative.

    1. peoplepower73 profile image89
      peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      There is a symbiotic relationship between the U.S. and Israel that does not exists with the Palestinans and never will.  Why, because of money. We and the Israelis have created an economic engine, we give them money, they buy our weapons, and it's a continuous cycle. AIPAC is an extremely powerful lobbying machine. Why should we support Israel and not the Palestinans?  It's because of  money, not becaues they are Arabs.  We support Saudi Arabia, they are Arabs, but they have money.

      1. gabgirl12 profile image59
        gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        And oil.

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      People,

      I posted this earlier, can you answer it now?

      Not for nothing, but I have to admit I spent a lot of hours last night researching this issue. As I have no faith do not believe in religion, honestly don't know much about the birth place of religions in such. All I know is that Jerusalem is considered the birthplace of Christianity, Judaism, and the Muslim faith. As I look at maps that I saw on Google going back to the ancient times, there our countries like the kingdom of Israel, the kingdom of Judah, the kingdom of Damascus, Assyrian Empire, Kingdom of Ammon. The map changes of course many times over the years. after World War II apparently the British came to control the territory and called it British Mandate for Palestine. They controlled all the people who lived there including but not limited to the Arabs and the Jews.

      The death of the al-Qassam in 1936 generated widespread outrage in the Arab community. Huge crowds accompanied Qassam's body to his grave in Haifa. A few months later, in April 1936, a spontaneous Arab national general strike broke out. The strike lasted until October 1936. During the summer of that year, thousands of Jewish-farmed acres and orchards were destroyed, Jewish civilians were attacked and killed, and some Jewish communities, such as those in Beisan and Acre, fled to safer areas. (Gilbert 1998, p. 80) The violence abated for about a year while the British sent the Peel Commission to investigate.
      By the time the Revolt concluded in March 1939, more than 5,000 Arabs, 400 Jews, and 200 Britons had been killed and at least 15,000 Arabs were wounded.[14] The Revolt resulted in the deaths of 5,000 Palestinian Arabs and the wounding of 10,000. In total, 10% of the adult Arab male population was killed, wounded, imprisoned, or exiled.(Khalidi 2001, p. 26) From 1936 to 1945, whilst establishing collaborative security arrangements with the Jewish Agency, the British confiscated 13,200 firearms from Arabs and 521 weapons from Jews.(Khalidi 1987, p. 845)

      The attacks on the Jewish population by Arabs had three lasting effects: First, they led to the formation and development of Jewish underground militias, primarily the Haganah, which were to prove decisive in 1948. Secondly, it became clear that the two communities could not be reconciled, and the idea of partition was born. Thirdly, the British responded to Arab opposition with the White Paper of 1939, which severely restricted Jewish land purchase and immigration. However, with the advent of World War II, even this reduced immigration quota was not reached. The White Paper policy also radicalised segments of the Jewish population, who after the war would no longer cooperate with the British.
      The name given to the Mandate's territory was "Palestine", in accordance with European traditions. The term Palestine was coined in the Western culture from the name of Palaestina province of the Roman (Syria-Palaestina) and later Byzantine Empire (Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Secunda). The Mandate charter stipulated that Mandatory Palestine would have three official languages, namely English, Arabic and Hebrew. It was not a country, it was a mandate

      in 1948 began the war for independence. The war was preceded by a period of civil war in the territory of the British Mandate of Palestine between Jewish Yishuv forces and Palestinian Arab forces in response to the UN Partition Plan. An alliance of Arab States intervened on the Palestinian side, turning the civil war into a war between sovereign states.[13] The fighting took place mostly on the former territory of the British Mandate and for a short time also in the Sinai Peninsula and southern Lebanon.[14] The war concluded with the 1949 Armistice Agreements, which established Armistice Demarcation Lines between Israeli and Arab military forces, commonly known as the Green Line.

      So one could say basically that the war was fought so that Israel could get its independence from Britain, sort of like the United States did.

      So Israel gets independence on the land that history shows on these maps was theirs to start with. The Palestinians, the PLO, a terrorist organization wants Israel to give up the land because the PLO claims it's theirs. Honestly I have not seen a map or read anywhere that said that land was theirs.

      I may be wrong with that I have read and research so far, or perhaps all those maps are wrong to, if so show me where I'm wrong. This from where I sit now I change my mind as to whether or not the Palestinians were entitled to a statehood. I once agreed but now I don't see why you do terrorists land to create a state that wasn't theirs in the first place.

      I am open to intelligent discussion on this. I don't want have baked opinions, or misguided innuendo. This subject has now truly piqued my curiosity and would love to hear others' input

      1. peoplepower73 profile image89
        peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        American View: It can be argued what the origins of the Palestinian people are, because in early history, it gets mixed up with Jewish factions and lack of identity.  It's true what you said about the British Mandate.  But I'm suprised in your research, you did not run across the Balfor Declaration of 1917.  This is the start of the modern day conflict. Here it is:

        Dear Lord Rothschild,

        I have much pleasure in conveying to you on behalf of His Majesty's Government the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations, which has been submitted to and approved by the Cabinet:

        "His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

        I should be grateful if you would bring this Declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

        Yours sincerely,

        Arthur James Balfour

        You notice in this declaration that there is an acknowledgment of a land called Palestine by the British.  The Palestinians were basically farmers and not very well educated.  After WWII, there was a great exodus of Jews from Europe to Israel, where these people settled. For the most part,  they were very well educated professional people and nothing like the Palestinians who were there before them.  The Jews separated themselves from those people by building barriers and not allowing them to go to Jewish schools or interact with the Jewish population, They did everything in there power to dumb them down, so they would never have the opportunities to better themselves...and the rest is history.  If you don't believe me, do the research.  I think we have attacked this issue from every angle possible.  As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.  Oh oh now the horse lovers are going to be upset with me.  Do research on the Balfour Declaration, it appears to be simple document, but the way it was used made it very powerful. I hope I have satisfied the answer to your question, if not, it will shed some new light on the subject.

        1. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          People,

          I have not come across that with the research I did. I will do some research and get back to you.

        2. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I'd love to see actual evidence of this, too. Why don't you share your research, peoplepower73?

          1. lovemychris profile image78
            lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Watch this....these are Americans who live in the conflict talking about it....along wth Palestinians and Jews....it's not anti-semitic, it's the truth.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSPatKNo-3Q

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              What Americans talking? it was Produced by the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees and Palestinians for Peace and Democracy, need I say more as to who they are? It shows interviews with Palisinian members. Total propaganda movie

          2. American View profile image61
            American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            LL,

            I am not sure if you're addressing me or not, but I will respond.

            I will share my research with peoplepower73 as soon as I do it later this evening. If you read my comment I said I had not come across that I needed to do research.  As for the rest of the actual research that I have already completed, all you have to do is just go up three comments, mine, peoples, then mine again and read, it's right there for everyone to read and in fact peoplepower73 left his comment to it.

        3. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          PeoplePower and since you wanted to see my responce LL,

          The more I read and research the more confident I feel about my new position. All the ancient text that I read talks about Israel as if it is a country or state. The letter you cited above, Balfor Declaration of 1917, was a letter from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild), a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.

          In 1914, war broke out in Europe between Britain with allies and Germany, Austria-Hungary and later that year, the Ottoman Empire. The war on the Western Front developed into a stalemate. Jonathan Shneer writes:

          Thus the view from Whitehall early in 1916: If defeat was not imminent, neither was victory; and the outcome of the war of attrition on the Western Front could not be predicted. The colossal forces in a death-grip across Europe and in Eurasia appeared to have canceled each other out. Only the addition of significant new forces on one side or the other seemed likely to tip the scale. Britain's willingness, beginning early in 1916, to explore seriously some kind of arrangement with "world Jewry" or "Great Jewry"

          In 1896, Theodor Herzl, a Jewish journalist living in Austria-Hungary, published Der Judenstaat ("The Jewish State"), in which he asserted that the only solution to the "Jewish Question" in Europe, including growing antisemitism, was through the establishment of a Jewish State. Political Zionism had just been born.[3] A year later, Herzl founded the Zionist Organization (ZO), which at its first congress, "called for the establishment of a home for the Jewish people in Palestine secured under public law"

          Palestine (from Latin: Palaestina; Hebrew: פלשת Pleshet, פלשתינה Palestina; Arabic: فلسطين‎ Filastīn, Falastīn) is one of several names for the geographic region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River with various adjoining lands. Many different definitions of the region have been used in the past three millennia.

          Other English names for this geographical region include: Canaan (Hebrew: כנען), Land of Israel (Hebrew: ארץ ישראל Erets Yisrael), Judea (Hebrew: יהודה yehuda), Holy Land (Hebrew: ארץ הקדש Erets Ha-Kodesh; Latin: Terra Sancta; Arabic: الأرض المقدسة‎ al-Ard al-Muqaddasah) and Cisjordan (not to be confused with the French term for the modern-day West Bank, Cisjordanie).

          The various names for the region are understood differently and are not identical in meaning.

          Ancient Egyptian texts call the entire levantine coastal area R-t-n-u (conventionally Retenu), which stretched along the Mediterranean coast in between modern Egypt and Turkey. It subdivided into three regions. Retenu's southern region (called Djahy) approximates modern Israel with the Palestinian Territories, the central region Lebanon, and the northern region (called Amurru) the Syrian coast as far north as the Orontes River near Turkey.

          During the Israelite Period (or Iron Age), the Kingdom of Israel of the United Monarchy reigned from Jerusalem over an area approximating modern Israel with the Palestinian Territories but extending farther westward and northward to cover much (but not all) of the greater Land of Israel. After the split, the southern part became the Kingdom of Judah, and the northern part the Kingdom of Israel.

          The term "Palestine" derives from the word Philistine, the name of a non-Semitic ethnic group, originating from Southern Greece,closely related to early Mycenaean civilization. They inhabited a smaller area on the southern coast, called Philistia, whose borders approximate the modern Gaza Strip. Philistia encompassed the five cities of Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath. The Egyptian texts of the temple at Medinet Habu, record a people called the P-r-s-t (conventionally Peleset), one of the Sea Peoples who invaded Egypt in Ramesses III's reign. This is considered very likely to be a reference to the Philistines. The Hebrew name Peleshet (Hebrew: פלשת Pəléshseth), usually translated as Philistia in English, is used in the Bible to denote their southern coastal region. The Assyrian emperor Sargon II called it the Palashtu in his Annals. The Philistines seem to have disappeared as a distinct ethnic group by the Assyrian period, however the name of their land remained. During the Persian Period, the Greek form was first used in the 5th century BCE by Herodotus who wrote of a "district of Syria, called Palaistinêi" (whence Latin: Palaestina, whence English: Palestine). The boundaries of the area he referred to were not explicitly stated, but Josephus used the name only for the smaller coastal area, Philistia. Ptolemy also used the term. In Latin, Pliny mentions a region of Syria that was "formerly called Palaestina" among the areas of the Eastern Mediterranean.

          During the Roman Period, the Province of Judea (including Samaria) covered most of Israel and the Palestinian territories. But following the Bar Kokhba rebellion, as part of a program of ethnic cleansing, the Romans tried to erase the Jewish connection to the land of Judea, and renamed it Syria Palaestina (Latin: Syria Palaestina) (including Judea) and Samaria.

          During the Byzantine Period, this entire region (including Syria Palestine, Samaria, and Galilee) was renamed Palaestina and then subdivided into Diocese I and II. The Byzantines also renamed an area of land including the Negev, Sinai, and the west coast of the Arabian Peninsula as Palaestina Salutoris, sometimes called Palaestina III. Since the Byzantine Period, the Byzantine borders of Palaestina (I and II) have served as a name for the geographic area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

          So as you can see from this text there is proof that Israel has been in existence going back to holy times, there are even maps showing its existence. I googled old middle east maps 1900 and there is a map showing the Kingdom of Israel, 17 years before the Balfor Declaration. If I am interpreting that letter corectly and in context of the times, it appears there was an effort to rid Europe of the Jews by having them leave the country. The answer as shown above was to send them back to the land from which they came and recognize their state.

          The ancient texts bears this out

          The Hebrew Bible calls the region Canaan (Hebrew: כּנען) when referring to the pre-Israelite period and thereafter Israel (Yisrael). The name "Land of the Hebrews" (Hebrew: ארץ העברים, Eretz Ha-Ivrim) is also found as well as several poetical names: "land flowing with milk and honey", "land that [God] swore to your fathers to assign to you", "Holy Land", "Land of the Lord", and the "Promised Land". The Land of Canaan is given a precise description in (Numbers 34:1) as including all of Lebanon as well(Joshua 13:5). The wide area appears to be the habitat of the ancient ethnic Hebrews, albeit shared with other ethnic groups. It is even said to extend as far as the Euphrates River Genesis 15:18 including an area called Aram Naharaim, which includes Haran in modern Turkey, from where Abraham the ancestor of the Israelites departed.

          The events of the Four Gospels of the Christian Bible take place entirely in Israel.

          In the Qur'an, the term الأرض المقدسة ("Holy Land", Al-Ard Al-Muqaddasah) is mentioned at least seven times, once when Moses proclaims to the Children of Israel: "O my people! Enter the holy land which Allah hath assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin." (Surah 5:21)

          It seems the Jewish people do have claims and rights to the land as they were there.All the reading I have done does not mention Palistinian people, but does mention Arab people. Am I wrong?

          1. livelonger profile image90
            livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The "Palestinian people" meaning Arabs living in Palestine is a new term, but so is the "Israeli people" meaning Jews living in (the modern state of) Israel. Regardless of how they both got there, both populations are rightful inhabitants of the region. How do we accommodate two people who claim the same land? The UN came up with one solution, to me the least worst option.

            1. Reality Bytes profile image93
              Reality Bytesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

               

              Not being Israeli or Palestinian, I can only question things. I do not understand why these people cannot live within the same Nation?

              1. livelonger profile image90
                livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The reason that most Israelis don't want that is that they are very different culturally, and they might be the minority in a few generations given different birthrates. An Arab majority might very well treat Jews pretty badly; this not a knock so much on Arabs as a reflection of about 2,000 years of Jews' experience living as a minority in Christian and Muslim lands.

                Besides, there are already many Arabs living in Israel; about 20% of Israelis are Arab. (I'm talking about in Israel proper, not the occupied territories)

                Americans, Canadians and Mexicans have far fewer differences - why don't we merge our countries into a single state?

                1. Reality Bytes profile image93
                  Reality Bytesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  We have attempted to merge Canada with the U.S., not sure of the year but it was during Reagan's Reign. The North American Union is still looming on the agenda.

                  I know the Israeli/Palestinian issue is far more complex then to be able to settle it on an internet forum.  Do you think that Israel operates similar to the apartheid era of South Africa?  I am genuinely asking your opinion, not stating mine.

                  edit...Does an individual need to follow the Jewish faith in order to become a citizen of Israel?  disclosure: hub research  smile

                  1. American View profile image61
                    American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    RB,

                    I never heard that about merging Canada and the US. How serious were they about that?

                2. gabgirl12 profile image59
                  gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  LOL, um because we get along livelonger.

                  Israeli are the perfect combination of religion + government + race. So are the Arabs except they have made exceptions in their gene pool. I've said this before and I hate repeating myself. They are the same polar, and therefore repel one another. The different birthrates are probably because Israeli's cannot breed like rabbits considering they don't mix well with other races. Arabs welcome new converts, work well with other races and have managed to incorporate their relgion into their government.

                  America, Canada and Mexico are countries, not defined by race or religion. There is more freedom there. They are the 'new world'.

                  1. livelonger profile image90
                    livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    1. There is no concept of race in Judaism. There are all colors of the rainbow among Jews: from blond, blue-eyed Europeans to black African Jews. There are Asian Jews. I am friends with an Indian Jew; he looks like any other Hindu or Muslim Indian, but he's Jewish. ALL Jewish, none more so than any other. Even in the Torah, Miriam is struck with tzaraat (a plague) for saying bad things about Moses's Ethiopian wife.

                    2. Considering the intermarrying of races in Israel happens very often, I think your comment about Israelis not mixing well with other races is profoundly wrong. Are you just "guessing" these things?

                    3. Arabs welcome new converts? Do you mean Islam? There are both Muslim and Christian Arabs, and both Islam and Christianity proselytize (actively seek converts). Judaism does not proselytize, but is open to converts; I'm a convert to Judaism myself.

                    4. If Canada, America and Mexico are not defined by culture or religion, then why don't we just merge? Sounds more plausible than asking Israelis and Palestinians, who don't share a language, religion, or culture, to merge into one country.

            2. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              LL,

              You have a great question, how do we accommodate two people? I truly understand that we want to bring a peaceful solution to the area, I was of the earlier opinion of giving the Palestinians a state, but due to the research I've been doing now, I'm not so sure that's the right answer. Everything I read tells me that this was Israeli territory going way back, including the ancient readings like I included above.  One reading says"

              "During the Israelite Period (or Iron Age), the Kingdom of Israel of the United Monarchy reigned from Jerusalem over an area approximating modern Israel"

              Now I am not religious nor do I understand the area very well which is why I asked questions and started this discussion. But I keep coming back to now is if this land was rightfully Israel's going way back, then I don't understand the Palestinians claim to it. That would be like Britain coming back and saying this is our land get out. Obviously a solution to this problem is above my pay grade, but I have to admit I learned a lot

              1. livelonger profile image90
                livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The solution is above all of ours, but it's still interesting to discuss.

                The concept of a nation-state is a modern one, really of the 20th century. Before then there were various empires, kingdoms, etc with constantly-changing borders, little in terms of laws or cultural cohesiveness. Before the 20th century, from what I understand, the land where Israel and Palestine lie was part of the Ottoman empire. When the last imperial occupier (Britain) left, who got the land? It seems both groups living there now should have the right to national self-determination.

          2. peoplepower73 profile image89
            peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            American View:  Thank you for your very comprehensive research.  If it were a matter of who occupied the land first, we would not be here.  The Native American Indians were here before us.  But look what we did to them.  We put them on reservations and made them refugees on their own land.  The Israelis are doing the same thing to the Palestinians.  Either you live peacefully with other cultures or you conquer them and assimilate them into your culture, like the conquistadores did,  but don't make them miserable by settling where they had their houses and make life intolerable for them.  I think I'm going to rest my case.  I've explored this enough. This forum was fun and very informative.

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Peoplepower,

              First I want to thank you for the civil discussion that we're having. I have to admit I learned a lot on this issue that did not know before. I have truly enjoyed it.

              I think your point on Native American Indians is where I was going next. You're absolutely right with what we did here to the Native Americans who were here first. If we apply that to Israel, Israel was there first much like the American Indians, Palestinians now when the take control much like we did to the Indians.

              But all that aside there'll always be a difference between the two due to the religious differences. But somehow they need to find a way to exist peacefully together. If I had the answer I would have a Nobel Peace Prize coming my way. But as I said to somebody else this topic as above my pay grade.

              Take care peoplepower and I will catch you at the next one

              1. Reality Bytes profile image93
                Reality Bytesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                They give Nobel Peace Prizes away to anybody these days, no accomplishments necessary! You still have a chance.  smile

                1. American View profile image61
                  American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  LMAO

  25. swordsbane profile image61
    swordsbaneposted 4 years ago

    Such a crossfire of ideology here... it's frightening.  Can't we call stupidity stupidity and stop with all the Zionist, Jew, Nazi, Left-wing, Right-wing talk??

    You all seem to be missing the point.  A bunch of idiots (Congress) decided to weld US foreign policy on Israel to a specific course with an idiotic bill.  Now, no matter the changing political environment, it will take another act of Congress to separate us from Israeli politics.

    Israel is a religious state.  There is no one even pretending this is not so.  We all know what happens when religion rules politics, so why do we call them a friend?  They stand for some pretty heavy fundamentals that we have rejected as wrong.  The rest of the region wants them destroyed, and yes.. that's bad, but if we're going to call Israel such an ally, then why are we pulling our punches when it comes to the other countries in the region?  Why are we not at war with them?  Why are we not placing our troops on the borders of Israel and fighting with them if this is such a clear cut case of good vs evil... so much so that we will pass a LAW that says we must help Israel??  Why aren't we doing everything we can to help Israel?

    Because politics is not about good and evil.  It's not about money.  The richest people in the world do not run the world.  There is a very important reason for this.  It's about advantage.  This bill wasn't put in place to support Israel.  It was put in place to support our own politics.

    There is only one rule in politics, and it is very logical as far as it goes: Appearing to try to solve a problem is better than actually solving the problem, because then it goes away and can't be used anymore to get votes.  This is why the gun control issue is always going to be around.  A logical assessment of the problem will show all of the studies that say that gun control doesn't work and a dearth of studies that say it does.  No one with any analytical skills could make a case for gun control, there would be no further attempts to pass gun control laws and the issue would be considered dead... BUT no politician would ever win votes after a shooting by saying "If ONLY there had been a law saying that guns were illegal, this wouldn't have happened." and no politician would ever win votes by saying "My opponent is for gun control.  He want's to take away your god-given right to own a gun."

    Instead, the problem stays in the public eye and both sides can gain votes by being for or against one side or another, as long as no one is stupid enough to actually figure out what the right course of action is and take it.

    The Israel issue is the same.  Both sides (I'm talking Republican and Democrat, not Israel and Muslim) gain by seeing Israel square off against Islam and the Arab world.  No one wins (politically speaking) if Israel wins, or if a Palestine is created.  This law is a statement of who's side the United States government is on, nothing more.  It is a statement that says "We'll support you in your fight.... as long as we don't have to actually help you.  Here's some money... Come back next election year."

    It's pretty much the only definite rule in politics, and even it isn't always followed, because sometimes failing to solve an easy problem is actually seen as incompetence (Yeah... who knew?)  It's the fight that's important... not who wins, although sometimes it is important who doesn't win.  If we let Israel get wiped out, then the conflict is over and we can't squeeze any more votes out of the situation.  As long as Israel survives, there will always be enemies in the region looking to destroy Israel.... as long as we don't do something foolish like try to come to a mutually beneficial resolution to the problem.

    Next time you see a political speech, try to keep in mind that the father of modern politics is none other than Adolph Hitler.  Most of the political techniques and speech tricks he used were pioneered by him and still used today.  They are used because they are very effective in keeping the sheep supporting the wolves instead of becoming wolves themselves.

    1. peoplepower73 profile image89
      peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      swordsbane:  Great analysis. It's a complex problem and very difficult to describe by design.  I don't think they want the average person to figure it out.  I call it the triangle of influence and here is how it works.  The house is up for re-election every two years.  The senate is up for re-election every six years, but they segmented it into thirds, so one third is up for re-election every two years.  That means that every two years congressman are running to get re-elected. They are almost in a perpetual re-election cycle.

      Today, it takes a lot of money to campaign because of air time.  If you visualize a triangle and put congress at the top and lobbyist and moneyed interests on the other two angles, it will form a triangle of influence. Here is how it works; The lobbyists represent the moneyed interests.  In this case lets say its AIPAC, but it could be any moneyed interest.  They give congressman the money they need to run for office.  The congressman via their ads produce the propaganda to brainwash the populus, so they can get the votes. The brainwashing is so effective, they don't even know they are voting against their best interests.  The congressman  in turn support the issues that the moneyed interests want. In this case, it's the bill  to support Israel.  The populus never gets represented, because they don't have the money that the moneyed interests have. The congressman gets re-elected.  In some cases, if he loses, he can always become a lobbyists and make more money than as a congressman. It's called the" revolving door concept." Lobbyists can also become congerssman.  What I have described can be overlayed on top of your posts as to what happens behind the scenes in politics today and why the little guy is not represented and why they really don't want the problems you described to go away. Beware of the fireman, he could be the arsonists!

      1. American View profile image61
        American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Firemen are arsonists now?  Maybe a better saying would be where there is smoke there is fire. Just saying since some people are so delicate here in these forums. I have been banned for saying less

        1. peoplepower73 profile image89
          peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Geez! It's just an analogy. It's not really about firemen. It's about creating a need for a service by the people who provide that service. For example, there would be no need for defense contractors if there were no wars. So beware of the defense contractor, he could be the one starting the wars. Now I've not only upset firemen, but also defense contractors.

          1. crazyhorsesghost profile image85
            crazyhorsesghostposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            You have a good point though. Vietnam was fought for the Defense Contractors. Kennedy was going to end the war and I think that may be why he was killed.

            1. gabgirl12 profile image59
              gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Let's hope we don't have a repeat. It's enough the current war we're in is completely bogus and all for one thing....oil.

          2. American View profile image61
            American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            People,

            LOL I did not mean to incinuate you offend firemen, I meant it as a joke because some people use the " being attacked" card real quick. Sorry, I guess I should have said it was a joke.

            But I was serious about why I was banned one time for.

            1. peoplepower73 profile image89
              peoplepower73posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              American View:  It's O.K.  We got a lot of mileage out of it!

              1. American View profile image61
                American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                smile

            2. gabgirl12 profile image59
              gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              How long are the ban's usually for? Were you told why?

              1. American View profile image61
                American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The bans start small, the first time is 3 day, the second is 5 days, then a week.  I do not know the process after that but I do know someone who was banned for 3 months.

                In my experience, the first time they did not tell me despite me e-mailing them. The second time I was banned they did not tell me, I e-mailed them and this time they responded. It turns out but I did was wrong. I had placed the link to one of my hubs in the comment section and that is a violation of the terms of service. Had they responded to my first e-mail when I was banned, I would have known better and not done it a second time. Third time was when I was in a discussion this guy Doug. He kept whining about something that was unfair. I told him to stop whining and get involved and do something. He reported me to hub pages but I attacked him were telling him to stop whining. I got banned for one week. When I e-mailed hub pages to find out why, they did not answer me. When I returned to the forums after being banned, the guy bragged about turning me in. There are those here that like to pull the "you're picking on me/bashing me" card. I call it the take pity move. It is becoming quite the move with people who disagree with you. It's moves like you disagree with Obama, your a racist. Of course you're not a racist, you just disagree.

                1. gabgirl12 profile image59
                  gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Ok, so if you are reported for any reason, you get banned? It is not properly assessed by the HubPages Admin? That will make things difficult because anyone can take offense at anything.

                  I have been on hubpages for 14 months but never got involved in the forums because I read about all the unfairness. It's only now that I post because I'm very serious about my causes. And I'm looking for information as well as personal opinions.

                  Hubpages seems to have the same 'no questions asked' policy as Google in regards to violations. So you were banned without knowing what it was about prior to your e-mail. Hmm..interesting. And definitely food for thought.

                  Thanks for the prompt answer.

                  1. American View profile image61
                    American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Gabgirl,

                    Any time, if the same policy for when your hub gets unpublished. Somebody report your hub and he gets unpublished, You can e-mail HP, you can just republish your article, at that point somebody from HP actually reviews it and will either allow the publication or un-publish it again. That to happens to me quite often. It's nothing more than somebody disagreeing with your point of view so they report you. Some people just act like children, like you I do just like to have a good discussion looking for answers.

  26. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Funny...Doug is not here anymore...but you are.

    And I really hate to school you...but if someone...oh like a big-wig pol refers to president Obama as The Welfare President....that's racist.

    If you say he was not born here.....that is borderline. IMO

    If you picture him with a bone through his nose....that is racist. If you say He's not a "real" American...that is borderline. IMO

    And if you tell someone to stop whining, that is a personal attack.

    So why don't you stop doing it.

    1. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Stop whining is a personal attack you say LMC, well you just proved my point Thank you

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        "So why don't you stop doing it."

        Stop telling me I'm whining.

  27. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "In 2009, the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), which is a hard-line Zionist group that wants Israel to retain the occupied territories and expand the Jewish settlements,  presented  Adelson its most distinguished and historic award, the Theodor Herzl Gold Medallion for outstanding achievement in Zionism.  His wife received the Louis D. Brandeis Award. The couple now have  their names on one of ZOA’s major awards, the Dr. Miriam & Sheldon Adelson Defender of Israel Award.

    Adelson is intimately involved in Israeli politics. Since 2007, Adelson has owned a daily newspaper in Israel  called Israel Hayom, which distributed free of charge, has the largest circulation of any newspaper in the country.  The newspaper is  ultra-supportive of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,  to whom Adelson is a close ideological ally and personal friend.  The newspaper also has been doing much to promote Gingrich."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/1 … 95867.html

  28. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "Israel’s lobby in America, AIPAC, is the only foreign agent in America that does not have to register under the Foreign Agent Registration Act. Almost every major American politician in the last decade has either met with AIPAC or flown to Israel to receive approval before running a campaign. Many of America’s congressman have admitted that they constantly ask how Israel feels about a bill before voting on it.

    And, on a side note, this video exposes how American zionists like Sheldon Adelson pay politicians such as Newt Gingrich to attack Ron Paul because he doesn’t support Israel. Now we know why Gingrich called Paul’s foreign policy “dangerous.”

    Goldman Sachs was the largest contributor to President Obama’s 2008 Presidential campaign and it has been widely estimated that American supporters of Israel contribute between 35-75% of all political contributions in American elections.”

    Source: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f78_1326802723

    1. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Goldman Sachs was the largest contributor to President Obama’s 2008 Presidential campaign"

      Finally somebody admitting to the fact about all the money president Obama took from Wall Street. Thank you LMC for showing Obama is a hypocrite

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Get off this thread av. Last warning. And More than you deserve.

        1. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          LMC,

          If you're not happy, you do not have to respond. LAST WARNING you say, so who is making threats?

        2. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          livelongerposted 45 hours ago in reply to this
          Lovemychris has posted fabricated quotes so her credibility is shot with me

          Is LL bashing you too

  29. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    —Rick Sanchez lost his job at CNN on Friday, a day after giving a satellite radio interview in which he called Jon Stewart a “bigot” and suggested that Jews run CNN and the news media in general.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/10 … z1xWE3GV8L

    1. gabgirl12 profile image59
      gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      wow you are very serious about this issue. hmm...interesting. I hope you have hubs about it. It might prove to be informational.

      1. lovemychris profile image78
        lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Only one. neo-zio-cons and 9/11.
        My beliefs are never taken seriously, and they act like it's some kind of joke.

        I belive these people killed 3,000 American on 9/11. And they wonder why I'm angry.

        and they glorify these types of people!!

        "William Koch, the third brother who had a falling-out with Charles and David back in the '80s over Charles' sociopathic management style, appeared on "60 Minutes" in November 2000 to tell the world that Koch Industries was a criminal enterprise: "It was - was my family company. I was out of it," he says. "But that's what appalled me so much... I did not want my family, my legacy, my father's legacy to be based upon organized crime."

        "Charles Koch's racket was very simple," explained William. "With its extensive oil pipe network, Koch Industries' role as an oil middleman--it buys crude from someone's well and sells it to a refinery--makes it easy to steal millions of dollars worth of oil by skimming just a little off the top of each transaction, or what they call "cheating measurements" in the oil trade. According to William, wells located on federal and Native American lands were the prime targets of the Koch scam."

          http://www.scribd.com/doc/30006881/Koch … om-Indians
        *********

        These people are bank-rolling our election!

        1. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          "These people are bank-rolling our election!"

          Despite the fact George Soros is pending 50 times more than they are and you're worried about them.I guess you're okay with it because he sent that money to the Democrats, I wonder what you would think if he sent that money to the Republicans.

      2. American View profile image61
        American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Gabgirl,

        Even though I posted this earlier, LMC continues to only give you have to story so here's the whole story.

        "On September 30, 2010, Sanchez was interviewed on Sirius XM's radio show Stand Up With Pete Dominick. Sanchez's interview occurred on the final day of his show in the 8 p.m. time slot and he was reportedly angry about being replaced by CNN's new Parker Spitzer talk show[14][15] as well as the occasional jokes made at his expense on The Daily Show. Sanchez called Daily Show host Jon Stewart a "bigot"; after questioning, Sanchez backed down from using the term and referred to Stewart as "prejudicial" and "uninformed."[16] When queried on the issue of whether Stewart likewise belonged to a minority group on account of his Jewish ethnicity, Sanchez responded,

        “    Yeah, very powerless people. [laughs] He's such a minority. I mean, you know, please. What—are you kidding? I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart. And to imply that somehow they, the people in this country who are Jewish, are an oppressed minority?[14][15]    ”
        Some media coverage suggested that Sanchez' comments insinuated that Jews controlled CNN and other networks.[14][15]

        Sanchez also described his experiences and opinion of news network practices,

        “    It's not just the right that does this. 'Cause I've known a lot of elite, Northeast establishment liberals that may not use this as a business model, but deep down, when they look at a guy like me, they look at a ... they see a guy automatically who belongs in the second tier and not the top tier ... White folks usually don't see it, but we do, those of us who are minorities ... Here, I'll give you my example, it's this, 'You know what, I don't want you anchoring anymore. I really don't see you as an anchor, I see you more as a reporter. I see you more as a John Quiñones.' You know, the guy on ABC. That's what he told me, he told me he saw me as John Quiñones. Now, did he not realize that he was telling me, 'when I see you I think of Hispanic reporters?' 'Cause in his mind, I can't be an anchor, an anchor's what you give the high profile white guys.[17]    ”
        In the day following his remarks,[18] CNN announced that Sanchez was no longer employed with the company.[14]

        Sanchez once called President Barack Obama a "cotton-picking president," a remark for which he apologized, explaining that he had grown up in the South where the phrase was a colloquialism."

        As you can see Sanchez was fired for being a racist, plain and simple. To narrow down that he only made a "comment" or "suggestion" against Jews is disingenuous

        1. lovemychris profile image78
          lovemychrisposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          If Sanchez was fired for being racist, how come Russsshhhhhhh still has a job?

          HE called Obama a jack-ass.

          1. American View profile image61
            American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            LMC,

            Calling someone a jackass is not racist. You do understand what racist speech is? I know you know better than that. Now if Rush called Obama a cotton picker like Sanchez did, I'd be first in line to say Rush would have to go.

  30. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Indain reservation was used in Inslaw scandal...Octopus.
    And the movie Thunderheart was all about that too...

    read The Last Circle...THIS is the world!

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio … rcle/1.htm

  31. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    You ignore all 3 videos I posted, all 3 articles backing up what I said...ignored! I'm NOT bothering anymore.

    You only believe what you want to believe.

  32. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    Actually though......I am supporting the Semetic people...you are supporting White Europeans.....soooooo

  33. gabgirl12 profile image59
    gabgirl12posted 4 years ago

    I just noticed, but its lagging terrible for me. This happened to me with another area of the forum. And usually when I click on the post via the notifications it will bring me to the page and then drop to the post. Sometimes it does, other times it doesnt, even if I refresh the page a few times. So I have to hunt for it.

  34. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago
  35. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    And I have been stopped. That is why I don't write hubs anymore. My last one was called S.O.S....about what is happening in this country. It was flagged, and gone.

    I won't bother anymore--knowing there is a clique here waiting to flag and vote down.

    But I will speak up, and this is my thread. Go away and bash me elsewhere.

    There are tons of anti-Obama anti-Muslim threads to log onto.

  36. lovemychris profile image78
    lovemychrisposted 4 years ago

    "See, Spin Spin Spin, Poor Me"

    "Not hard to figure out why it's being done"

    "LMC wants everyone to believe the Republicans are trying to push something through against the Democrats please "

    "Maybe you ear is ringing from the siren of the ambulance that took you to the loony farm"

    "Typical left response, whine, cry, spin, deflect, blame others, whatever"

    "is that why you're so against the Jews?"

    "I know, she is in another thread crying right now that I am attacking her"

    "You would because his opinions are the same as your opinions, anti-Israel"

    "Continued to spin and deflect by trying to play yourself as the victim."
    ***********

    Why do I have to put up with that?

    1. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      So where is the bashing in that list?

    2. swordsbane profile image61
      swordsbaneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      You don't have to put up with that.  If you think AV is being a jerk, stop responding to him and he'll give up and go away.  If he's not being a jerk, stop saying he is.  Either answer his statements or don't.  Don't pick those statements apart and complain about them.  This is a discussion, not an insult contest.  Please treat it accordingly REGARDLESS of what anyone else does.

      AV.. that goes for you too.

      Sheesh.. I feel like a first grade teacher... :}

      1. gabgirl12 profile image59
        gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        They probably like each other.
        It's obvious the males are picking her because
        1. She's a woman.
        2. They are not impressed by her verbiage.
        3. She lacks enough credibility that they wouldn't delve further.
        4. They are eager to prove they dominate.
        5. They think it automatically gives their point more weight, so they feel comfortable enough in bashing that no one would really care anyway.
        6. They probably think she's some psycho trying to get attention on the forums.

        I've been in here position before. Then I made a point to improve my vocabulary and make it a point to just be understood. And not have the position of someone who just wants people to 'believe me'.

        Some of what she is saying deserves merit and are things that are ignored. There is also religious bias. It's just sad no one else jumps in to bring the additional weight she needs to prove her point clearly.

        I have added a few things to balance the weight, but they are consistent in trying to bully her instead of take it up with others who see the validity in what she is posting. I'm female thought and very strong minded. Frankly I'm starting to wonder if they are mysogynists.

        1. swordsbane profile image61
          swordsbaneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          both lmc and av seem to have either very poor typing skills or they don't take the appropriate care in trying to be understood.  That is the number one rule in debating; if you speak clearly, it is the other person's responsibility to understand you.  If you don't, then it doesn't matter if you're right, no one will know, and it will be your fault.

          I've seen many a pointless argument exist simply because something one of them said was misunderstood.  I have very little tolerance for that.

          I see that a lot from both of them here.

        2. American View profile image61
          American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          GABGIRL,

          I have not seen you many times here in the forums and I have only responded to you a few times. I asked you, at any time have I ever not been civil to you, have I ever not responded or answered your question to me, have I never talk down to you? The answer is no, nor do I do it to anybody else. You are a woman, mighty mom is a woman, habee is a woman and there are many more that I have had great conversations with ensure they would tell you the same. I'm disappointed if you have been reading or following me she would ever say I treat women different

          As for her verbiage, I am the last person that you will ever find say anything about how somebody speaks or their language skills here. I cannot do anything without spell check, you are talking to somebody was handed his high school diploma and told to never return. I promise you I did not earn it, they just did not want me back because I was hell on wheels as a child. Believe me, we see my comments, read my hubs, listen to me on my show, grammatically correct I will never be.

          What I will not put up with for very long is was somebody response to me with half-truths, attacks me but when I asked a simple question, I get accused of being a basher. Much like you stood up for your self for those who talk down to you, I admit that I won't let it go for long before I stand up for myself.

          Gabgirl, you give your opinion, you ask questions, and when somebody has asked you a question about your opinion you respond in kind and explain why you come to your conclusions. We don't go out and say "I believe this, or I hate them". You may hate the New York Yankees and are entitled to that feeling, but you can't come out and say that they suck and are horrible when they of won more World Series than any other team. And when that gets pointed out, you can't just blow it off and try to force everyone to believe your point of view.  I don't know if I'm explaining this well

          BTW, here is what someone else said earlier here in the Hub and LMC never responded it it, yet I am the bad guy. ( I am not saying that you think I am the bad guy)


          livelongerposted 45 hours ago in reply to this
          Lovemychris has posted fabricated quotes so her credibility is shot with me

          1. swordsbane profile image61
            swordsbaneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            AV: It's a small critique in the scheme of things, but I just have to say that lack of schooling is no excuse for a lack of education, or do you think that school is the only place you can learn things?  It's certainly not a good excuse for using language that contributes to you not being understood in this forum.  It may not be your fault, but if you aren't capable of using good language skills, then you can't blame others for not understanding you.  We can only read what you write.  If we have to guess at the meaning, then sometimes we'll guess right and sometimes we'll guess wrong, and you can't be mad when we guess wrong.

            I'm not asking you to be grammatically correct, or even spell correctly.  But you DO have to make sure what you say cannot be interpreted other than how you mean it, especially when you argue with someone else about what you mean and what you are saying.  Take the time to say what you mean so that people take you seriously, and so that you don't have to repeat yourself.

            LMC; I hope you're listening too.  You're even worse at it than AV, compounded by the fact that you don't listen to what people say.  You only listen to what you expect them to mean.  If you're doing it accidentally, then you are sloppy.  If you are doing it on purpose, then you are disingenuous.  Either way, you can't expect people to take you seriously.  I suspect this is why you feel you are being "bashed" all the time.

            1. American View profile image61
              American Viewposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Sword,

              I do not make excuses for anything in my life, please do not take what I said as an excuse, it was not meant that way.

              I come from the streets of NY, a former gang kid at the age of 8. I became a NY firefighter due to the challege of my Juvy officer but did not know it at the time, and became a LT. After I became VP of Metoplex development and grew them into a company that built 2500 homes per year and $65 million in commercial work. My current health conditions due to 9/11 keep me home bound these days.

              So I have no education but I do believe the success of my life means I am understood.

              Have you  read the entire forum here, or any other forum I am on, I seem to be understood by everyone else, I seem to be getting my point out there as I have good discussions with everyone else. Me and peoplepower had a good discussion here and I even admitted I learned a lot from it. As well as Livelonger, gabgirl and others.

              I do appreciate you input and fell free to critique, I always accept it and think we all grow from it.

          2. gabgirl12 profile image59
            gabgirl12posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            You and livelonger are bashing, mocking and egging her on.  Suffice to say one of you is actually an Admin on Hubpages.  This isn't proper behavior for anyone.  It needs to stop or this thread needs to be closed.

     
    working