Zionist Occupied America (878)
Conrad73: Do you Imagine the Stink it would have raised?
Doesn't seem to bother them where they live.
------ This thread is Archived ------
gininitaly: Doesn't seem to bother them where they live.
Now that is a neighborly remark!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Wow_Factor:
Yep, certainly is. Heck even Jews arguing with other Jews in Israel. You ought to see them stoning each other. The world has gone mad, mad I tell you.
Yep, certainly is. Heck even Jews arguing with other Jews in Israel. You ought to see them stoning each other. The world has gone mad, mad I tell you.
Glad to hear it
.... nothing better than honing our philosophies and taking a position. 
------ This thread is Archived ------
Not fond of stoning... but yes, we've gone mad. 
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conrad73: Now that is a neighborly remark!
------ This thread is Archived ------
gininitaly:
Careful! It's gonna drop out!
------ This thread is Archived ------
[quote=AlbertaghostThe Sinai was returned upon the Egyptian Israeli peace agreement. Jordan didn't want the West Bank back as they know it isn't theirs to begin with anyhow and either is most of their land as it belongs to Palestinians but you don't hear much about that.
I thought you were actually going to try to answer my questions of Silverbirch but no I see you can't.
From what I understand Britain had more to do with it than anybody.
Have you some proof of the assertion you make in the first paragraph above? As I recall it, the Brits decided to amend the border between the Palistine area and TransJordan to make it be the Jordan River.
There's no such thing as "can't". I was posting pretty late last night and had no time then to do any research at all. I was just catching up on the posts I missed while I was at the pub and the Republican caucus. I might get more time today.
In any event it's not my responsibility to answer your questions of SB. He just posted an article so even he does not have to answer to you for the statements made by the author, even if he agrees with him.
I think you are right about the English connection, they failed badly in their responsibilities, of course the King David Hotel thing didn't help them to focus. Terrorism sucks.
And in my opinion (not yet researched) the UN did not effectively respond to the war between the new state of Israel and the 5 Arab armies. Everyone should have been forced to return to the original partition lines. The 5 Arab states should have been forced to compensate Israel for the damages resultant from their war and the refugees returned to their homes in Israel. The conquest of land by war (offensive or defensive) is against the UN rules. Otherwise the USA would now "own" Iraq and Afghanistan.
I thought you were actually going to try to answer my questions of Silverbirch but no I see you can't.
From what I understand Britain had more to do with it than anybody.
Have you some proof of the assertion you make in the first paragraph above? As I recall it, the Brits decided to amend the border between the Palistine area and TransJordan to make it be the Jordan River.
There's no such thing as "can't". I was posting pretty late last night and had no time then to do any research at all. I was just catching up on the posts I missed while I was at the pub and the Republican caucus. I might get more time today.
In any event it's not my responsibility to answer your questions of SB. He just posted an article so even he does not have to answer to you for the statements made by the author, even if he agrees with him.
I think you are right about the English connection, they failed badly in their responsibilities, of course the King David Hotel thing didn't help them to focus. Terrorism sucks.
And in my opinion (not yet researched) the UN did not effectively respond to the war between the new state of Israel and the 5 Arab armies. Everyone should have been forced to return to the original partition lines. The 5 Arab states should have been forced to compensate Israel for the damages resultant from their war and the refugees returned to their homes in Israel. The conquest of land by war (offensive or defensive) is against the UN rules. Otherwise the USA would now "own" Iraq and Afghanistan.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Paldi5: [quote=AlbertaghostThe Sinai was returned upon the Egyptian Israeli peace agreement. Jordan didn't want the West Bank back as they know it isn't theirs to begin with anyhow and either is most of their land as it belongs to Palestinians but you don't hear much about that.
I thought you were actually going to try to answer my questions of Silverbirch but no I see you can't.
From what I understand Britain had more to do with it than anybody.
I thought you were actually going to try to answer my questions of Silverbirch but no I see you can't.
From what I understand Britain had more to do with it than anybody.
Have you some proof of the assertion you make in the first paragraph above? As I recall it, the Brits decided to amend the border between the Palistine area and TransJordan to make it be the Jordan River.
There's no such thing as "can't". I was posting pretty late last night and had no time then to do any research at all. I was just catching up on the posts I missed while I was at the pub and the Republican caucus. I might get more time today.
In any event it's not my responsibility to answer your questions of SB. He just posted an article so even he does not have to answer to you for the statements made by the author, even if he agrees with him.
I think you are right about the English connection, they failed badly in their responsibilities, of course the King David Hotel thing didn't help them to focus. Terrorism sucks.
And in my opinion (not yet researched) the UN did not effectively respond to the war between the new state of Israel and the 5 Arab armies. Everyone should have been forced to return to the original partition lines. The 5 Arab states should have been forced to compensate Israel for the damages resultant from their war and the refugees returned to their homes in Israel. The conquest of land by war (offensive or defensive) is against the UN rules. Otherwise the USA would now "own" Iraq and Afghanistan.
------ This thread is Archived ------
gininitaly: Then PROVE the opposite Con.
Well there were a lot more allys than that one to talk to, why Israel predominantly?
Do you see any Israelis on this list?
Simple As one who was there and worked firstly in Air HQ and then HQ BFME I speak with DIRECT INFORMATION.Well there were a lot more allys than that one to talk to, why Israel predominantly?
Do you see any Israelis on this list?
At a very early stage the Israeli's had been asked to stay out and clear by the Allies.
Reason if they had joined the allies then the fragile coalition of Muslims in the allied force would have withdrawn
Air Vice Marshal Wilson gave a briefing to Generals De La Billiere and Schwarzkopf (excuse spelling) in October/November as the allied forces built up in and around Saudi Arabia and the Gulf ports.
This briefing outlaid the problems from the Pakistanis and the Saudi viewpoint and the way Saddam could use the attack as Anti Islamic.
Now I was working at the briefing putting on slides and computer graphic displays as he spoke.
No Israeli's attended but the brief was used as part of a diplomatic brief to Israel and they AGREED to stay out and not retaliate.
This they did even after Saddam launched Scuds at them.
So that may show you a little of the background folks.
Now can we get back to the OP's point.
Zionist Occupied America
------ This thread is Archived ------
Paldi5: Have you some proof of the assertion you make in the first paragraph above? As I recall it, the Brits decided to amend the border between the Palistine area and TransJordan to make it be the Jordan River.
There's no such thing as "can't". I was posting pretty late last night and had no time then to do any research at all. I was just catching up on the posts I missed while I was at the pub and the Republican caucus. I might get more time today.
In any event it's not my responsibility to answer your questions of SB. He just posted an article so even he does not have to answer to you for the statements made by the author, even if he agrees with him.
I think you are right about the English connection, they failed badly in their responsibilities, of course the King David Hotel thing didn't help them to focus. Terrorism sucks.
And in my opinion (not yet researched) the UN did not effectively respond to the war between the new state of Israel and the 5 Arab armies. Everyone should have been forced to return to the original partition lines. The 5 Arab states should have been forced to compensate Israel for the damages resultant from their war and the refugees returned to their homes in Israel. The conquest of land by war (offensive or defensive) is against the UN rules. Otherwise the USA would now "own" Iraq and Afghanistan.
Actually Jordan is sitting on 80% of the Former Mandate!There's no such thing as "can't". I was posting pretty late last night and had no time then to do any research at all. I was just catching up on the posts I missed while I was at the pub and the Republican caucus. I might get more time today.
In any event it's not my responsibility to answer your questions of SB. He just posted an article so even he does not have to answer to you for the statements made by the author, even if he agrees with him.
I think you are right about the English connection, they failed badly in their responsibilities, of course the King David Hotel thing didn't help them to focus. Terrorism sucks.
And in my opinion (not yet researched) the UN did not effectively respond to the war between the new state of Israel and the 5 Arab armies. Everyone should have been forced to return to the original partition lines. The 5 Arab states should have been forced to compensate Israel for the damages resultant from their war and the refugees returned to their homes in Israel. The conquest of land by war (offensive or defensive) is against the UN rules. Otherwise the USA would now "own" Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Leftover 20% were to be divided and become anJewish and an Arab State!
The Jews accepted,and Israel was born!
The Arab rejected,went to War at the behest of their Leaders,and are holding the Poopy End of the Stick ever since!
They ought to have strung up Mohammad Amin al-Husayni,the Mufti Of Jerusalem,instead of listening to him!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Paldi5: Have you some proof of the assertion you make in the first paragraph above? As I recall it, the Brits decided to amend the border between the Palistine area and TransJordan to make it be the Jordan River.
There's no such thing as "can't". I was posting pretty late last night and had no time then to do any research at all. I was just catching up on the posts I missed while I was at the pub and the Republican caucus. I might get more time today.
In any event it's not my responsibility to answer your questions of SB. He just posted an article so even he does not have to answer to you for the statements made by the author, even if he agrees with him.
I think you are right about the English connection, they failed badly in their responsibilities, of course the King David Hotel thing didn't help them to focus. Terrorism sucks.
And in my opinion (not yet researched) the UN did not effectively respond to the war between the new state of Israel and the 5 Arab armies. Everyone should have been forced to return to the original partition lines. The 5 Arab states should have been forced to compensate Israel for the damages resultant from their war and the refugees returned to their homes in Israel. The conquest of land by war (offensive or defensive) is against the UN rules. Otherwise the USA would now "own" Iraq and Afghanistan.
There's no such thing as "can't". I was posting pretty late last night and had no time then to do any research at all. I was just catching up on the posts I missed while I was at the pub and the Republican caucus. I might get more time today.
In any event it's not my responsibility to answer your questions of SB. He just posted an article so even he does not have to answer to you for the statements made by the author, even if he agrees with him.
I think you are right about the English connection, they failed badly in their responsibilities, of course the King David Hotel thing didn't help them to focus. Terrorism sucks.
And in my opinion (not yet researched) the UN did not effectively respond to the war between the new state of Israel and the 5 Arab armies. Everyone should have been forced to return to the original partition lines. The 5 Arab states should have been forced to compensate Israel for the damages resultant from their war and the refugees returned to their homes in Israel. The conquest of land by war (offensive or defensive) is against the UN rules. Otherwise the USA would now "own" Iraq and Afghanistan.
SO Fred going by you last Paragraph. Would you like to Give Texas back to Mexico?
What was the battle of independence of Texas from Mexico?
There were many, but the most important included the battles of El Alamo (February 23 - March 6 1836) and of San Jacinto (April 21, 1836).If you mean the WAR, it was the Texas Revolution (1835-1836).
When did texas gain its independence from mexico?
March 2 1836
What important battle with Mexico gave Texas its independence?
The Battle of San Jacincanatio.
What battles did Texas won?
The Alabhama Hydes
Which state won its independence from Mexico?
Texas gained its Independence and was a Republic before joing the Union.
I mean according to you and the U N as you say Texas is really Mexico is it not ?
Now for the umpteenth time folks get back to the Zionists and AMERICA point of the thread.
THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT ISRAEL OR ANY WAR.
------ This thread is Archived ------
We need Silverbirch's expert opinion on this subject as it was obviously a matter very close to his heart, so perhaps we should wait for his return.
------ This thread is Archived ------
patmac: SO Fred going by you last Paragraph. Would you like to Give Texas back to Mexico?
What was the battle of independence of Texas from Mexico?
There were many, but the most important included the battles of El Alamo (February 23 - March 6 1836) and of San Jacinto (April 21, 1836).If you mean the WAR, it was the Texas Revolution (1835-1836).
When did texas gain its independence from mexico?
March 2 1836
What important battle with Mexico gave Texas its independence?
The Battle of San Jacincanatio.
What battles did Texas won?
The Alabhama Hydes
Which state won its independence from Mexico?
Texas gained its Independence and was a Republic before joing the Union.
I mean according to you and the U N as you say Texas is really Mexico is it not ?
Now for the umpteenth time folks get back to the Zionists and AMERICA point of the thread.
THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT ISRAEL OR ANY WAR.
There never was an Occupation!What was the battle of independence of Texas from Mexico?
There were many, but the most important included the battles of El Alamo (February 23 - March 6 1836) and of San Jacinto (April 21, 1836).If you mean the WAR, it was the Texas Revolution (1835-1836).
When did texas gain its independence from mexico?
March 2 1836
What important battle with Mexico gave Texas its independence?
The Battle of San Jacincanatio.
What battles did Texas won?
The Alabhama Hydes
Which state won its independence from Mexico?
Texas gained its Independence and was a Republic before joing the Union.
I mean according to you and the U N as you say Texas is really Mexico is it not ?
Now for the umpteenth time folks get back to the Zionists and AMERICA point of the thread.
THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT ISRAEL OR ANY WAR.
Or about as much a one as there was an impending Communist Takeover in the McCartney Era!
------ This thread is Archived ------
"SO Fred going by you last Paragraph. Would you like to Give Texas back to Mexico?"
I sure would !
I sure would !
------ This thread is Archived ------
patmac: SO Fred going by you last Paragraph. Would you like to Give Texas back to Mexico?
What was the battle of independence of Texas from Mexico?
There were many, but the most important included the battles of El Alamo (February 23 - March 6 1836) and of San Jacinto (April 21, 1836).If you mean the WAR, it was the Texas Revolution (1835-1836).
When did texas gain its independence from mexico?
March 2 1836
What important battle with Mexico gave Texas its independence?
The Battle of San Jacincanatio.
What battles did Texas won?
The Alabhama Hydes
Which state won its independence from Mexico?
Texas gained its Independence and was a Republic before joing the Union.
I mean according to you and the U N as you say Texas is really Mexico is it not ?
Now for the umpteenth time folks get back to the Zionists and AMERICA point of the thread.
THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT ISRAEL OR ANY WAR.
What was the battle of independence of Texas from Mexico?
There were many, but the most important included the battles of El Alamo (February 23 - March 6 1836) and of San Jacinto (April 21, 1836).If you mean the WAR, it was the Texas Revolution (1835-1836).
When did texas gain its independence from mexico?
March 2 1836
What important battle with Mexico gave Texas its independence?
The Battle of San Jacincanatio.
What battles did Texas won?
The Alabhama Hydes
Which state won its independence from Mexico?
Texas gained its Independence and was a Republic before joing the Union.
I mean according to you and the U N as you say Texas is really Mexico is it not ?
Now for the umpteenth time folks get back to the Zionists and AMERICA point of the thread.
THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT ISRAEL OR ANY WAR.
The UN position on conquest of land in war, was written long after Texas. Re: the conquest of land in wars - this act is illegal. Every member of the UN signed off on this, I believe.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conrad73: There never was an Occupation!
Or about as much a one as there was an impending Communist Takeover in the McCartney Era!
I think Senator Joe was about as mistaken as our OP is!Or about as much a one as there was an impending Communist Takeover in the McCartney Era!
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: "SO Fred going by you last Paragraph. Would you like to Give Texas back to Mexico?"I sure would !
How about CALI?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Paldi5: The UN position on conquest of land in war, was written long after Texas. Re: the conquest of land in wars - this act is illegal. Every member of the UN signed off on this, I believe.
What Conquest of What Land?
The Land Israel is presently holding in Lieu of a Peacetreaty?
------ This thread is Archived ------
patmac, the problem with this post (among many) is that Al started asking questions about Resolution 181 - which has nothing to do with the thread title. So everyone is talking about the UN and the partition and the wars that happened after that.
You with your posts about the "numbers" and mine about the Israel Lobby are more on topic, I think.
The thread is mis-named as to what people seem to WANT to talk about. All these Middle East threads get back to the same things: ligitamacy, anti-semetism, the use of power or terror rather than following international law, the UN is discredited and disrespected. Stuff like that.
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181
November 29, 1947
You with your posts about the "numbers" and mine about the Israel Lobby are more on topic, I think.
The thread is mis-named as to what people seem to WANT to talk about. All these Middle East threads get back to the same things: ligitamacy, anti-semetism, the use of power or terror rather than following international law, the UN is discredited and disrespected. Stuff like that.
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181
November 29, 1947
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Too many fake profiles here ...
Blast From The Past
What Clothes Do You Feel Comfortable Wearing?
a question
Scam Alert!
the death nail for dating websites
Name A Book In The Bible That Begins With The First Letter Of Your Name
The GOP: Is this who you are?
"Emotions at the Crossroads"
Has Anyone Tried Cruise For Singles?
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Related Forums
- Too many fake profiles here ...
- Blast From The Past
- What Clothes Do You Feel Comfortable Wearing?
- a question
- Scam Alert!
- the death nail for dating websites
- Name A Book In The Bible That Begins With The First Letter Of Your Name
- The GOP: Is this who you are?
- "Emotions at the Crossroads"
- Has Anyone Tried Cruise For Singles?
Anyone who thinks the allies did not consult and keep Israel informed off all events during GW1 is not only stupid but not facing reality.
Israel was consulted throughout. It supplied information and promised to stay out of the war and did so even when attacked.
I fail to see what that has to do with America being controlled by Zionists.The OP has yet to prove his point and will not answer questions. All this reference to Blair and wars is muddying the discussion.
Let us discuss (take note S B) THE REAL POINT OF THE THREAD.
So we need to get back to discussing America not Israel and the War
Well what do you suppose are their points interests besides banking Pat?