About Us

F.O.A.D.

On 12/21/13, 12:30 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 19:20:11 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

"Redman" in connection with Native Americans is a derogatory term.

You obviously don't know anything about the ancient peoples, medieval
history, or 19th and 20th Century history of that part of the Middle East.

There were at least two times when Partition, or the creation of two
separate nations, was offered to the self-described Palestinians...about
100 years ago and right after World War II. They turned it down both
times and in 1948, the Arab nations initiated a war against Israel. The
Israelis fought back and the Arabs lost.

The question is how many of those "Israelis" lived in Palestine five
years before that war? Virtually none of them. They were in Europe.

Your knowledge of history is...lacking.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

F.O.A.D.

On 12/21/13, 10:40 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 07:28:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 12/21/13, 12:30 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 19:20:11 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

"Redman" in connection with Native Americans is a derogatory term.

You obviously don't know anything about the ancient peoples, medieval
history, or 19th and 20th Century history of that part of the Middle East.

There were at least two times when Partition, or the creation of two
separate nations, was offered to the self-described Palestinians...about
100 years ago and right after World War II. They turned it down both
times and in 1948, the Arab nations initiated a war against Israel. The
Israelis fought back and the Arabs lost.

The question is how many of those "Israelis" lived in Palestine five
years before that war? Virtually none of them. They were in Europe.

Your knowledge of history is...lacking.

They were mostly European refugees, you can't change that fact.

Interesting word, that... "Refugee." Why were they refugees?

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

F.O.A.D.

On 12/21/13, 12:38 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 11:11:48 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

They were mostly European refugees, you can't change that fact.

Interesting word, that... "Refugee." Why were they refugees?

Because the allies were not willing to do the right thing, force the
Germans, French and Russians to give them their land back.
For us, that would be the Truman administration.
It was easier to let them go invade a country full of brown people who
we did not care about.
FDR even refused admittance into the US during the war. (The St Louis
incident)
Nobody amongst the dems is willing to call their heroes anti-simitic
tho.

I wonder that if we knew we might want to buy oil from those arabs a
couple decades later that we would have made a different choice.

Really?

Apparently you aren't aware that in many European countries, Jews were
not allowed to own land or much of anything else in the way of real
property. That's why many became shopkeepers. Further, much of Europe
had been destroyed by years of heavy duty warfare, and there wasn't much
to go back to, eh? Third, many of those who left for Israel had already
spent years in concentration camps or in hiding, and it seemed
reasonable for them to seek out a better, if tough life, in an area that
was mostly unoccupied and undeveloped. Who do you think built and
occupied the kibbutzim? Finally, most of the civilized world after the
war was feeling guilty for allowing the slaughter of the Jews and felt
those people were "owed" back their historical homeland.

It has nothing to do with "brown" people, since, genetically, the
so-called Palestinians are pretty much the same stock as the
Mediterranean Caucasians who lived in Italy, Greece, Turkey, and in the
diaspora of the Jews.

Oh, I see we're back to the money thing again with you...the buying of
oil from the Arabs. Arabs, by the way, typically are classified as
"white people," not "brown people," and Muslims come in every skin
color. A few decent liberal arts courses might have "learned you" that.
And of course, Jews in fairly substantial numbers emigrated to Israel in
the late 19th Century and right after WWII in the 20th Century.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

F.O.A.D.

wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 12:55:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 12/21/13, 12:38 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 11:11:48 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

They were mostly European refugees, you can't change that fact.

Interesting word, that... "Refugee." Why were they refugees?

Because the allies were not willing to do the right thing, force the
Germans, French and Russians to give them their land back.
For us, that would be the Truman administration.
It was easier to let them go invade a country full of brown people who
we did not care about.
FDR even refused admittance into the US during the war. (The St Louis
incident)
Nobody amongst the dems is willing to call their heroes anti-simitic
tho.

I wonder that if we knew we might want to buy oil from those arabs a
couple decades later that we would have made a different choice.

Really?

Apparently you aren't aware that in many European countries, Jews were
not allowed to own land or much of anything else in the way of real
property. That's why many became shopkeepers. Further, much of Europe
had been destroyed by years of heavy duty warfare, and there wasn't much
to go back to, eh? Third, many of those who left for Israel had already
spent years in concentration camps or in hiding, and it seemed
reasonable for them to seek out a better, if tough life, in an area that
was mostly unoccupied and undeveloped. Who do you think built and
occupied the kibbutzim? Finally, most of the civilized world after the
war was feeling guilty for allowing the slaughter of the Jews and felt
those people were "owed" back their historical homeland.

It has nothing to do with "brown" people, since, genetically, the
so-called Palestinians are pretty much the same stock as the
Mediterranean Caucasians who lived in Italy, Greece, Turkey, and in the
diaspora of the Jews.

Oh, I see we're back to the money thing again with you...the buying of
oil from the Arabs. Arabs, by the way, typically are classified as
"white people," not "brown people," and Muslims come in every skin
color. A few decent liberal arts courses might have "learned you" that.
And of course, Jews in fairly substantial numbers emigrated to Israel in
the late 19th Century and right after WWII in the 20th Century.

So now you agree it was just a bunch of European invaders. We are
getting somewhere.

No I just don't have your simpleminded view of things.

F.O.A.D.

On 12/22/13, 1:22 AM, wrote:
On 22 Dec 2013 04:23:23 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 12:55:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 12/21/13, 12:38 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 11:11:48 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

They were mostly European refugees, you can't change that fact.

Interesting word, that... "Refugee." Why were they refugees?

Because the allies were not willing to do the right thing, force the
Germans, French and Russians to give them their land back.
For us, that would be the Truman administration.
It was easier to let them go invade a country full of brown people who
we did not care about.
FDR even refused admittance into the US during the war. (The St Louis
incident)
Nobody amongst the dems is willing to call their heroes anti-simitic
tho.

I wonder that if we knew we might want to buy oil from those arabs a
couple decades later that we would have made a different choice.

Really?

Apparently you aren't aware that in many European countries, Jews were
not allowed to own land or much of anything else in the way of real
property. That's why many became shopkeepers. Further, much of Europe
had been destroyed by years of heavy duty warfare, and there wasn't much
to go back to, eh? Third, many of those who left for Israel had already
spent years in concentration camps or in hiding, and it seemed
reasonable for them to seek out a better, if tough life, in an area that
was mostly unoccupied and undeveloped. Who do you think built and
occupied the kibbutzim? Finally, most of the civilized world after the
war was feeling guilty for allowing the slaughter of the Jews and felt
those people were "owed" back their historical homeland.

It has nothing to do with "brown" people, since, genetically, the
so-called Palestinians are pretty much the same stock as the
Mediterranean Caucasians who lived in Italy, Greece, Turkey, and in the
diaspora of the Jews.

Oh, I see we're back to the money thing again with you...the buying of
oil from the Arabs. Arabs, by the way, typically are classified as
"white people," not "brown people," and Muslims come in every skin
color. A few decent liberal arts courses might have "learned you" that.
And of course, Jews in fairly substantial numbers emigrated to Israel in
the late 19th Century and right after WWII in the 20th Century.

So now you agree it was just a bunch of European invaders. We are
getting somewhere.

No I just don't have your simpleminded view of things.

You write a 40 line dialog explaining why you think the European
refugees had the RIGHT to invade Palestine and then you deny it
happened. That is simple minded.

Really? There have been Jews in that part of the Middle East for
thousands of years, long before there were Muslims there.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

F.O.A.D.

On 12/22/13, 10:43 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 07:50:50 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 12/22/13, 1:22 AM, wrote:

No I just don't have your simpleminded view of things.

You write a 40 line dialog explaining why you think the European
refugees had the RIGHT to invade Palestine and then you deny it
happened. That is simple minded.

Really? There have been Jews in that part of the Middle East for
thousands of years, long before there were Muslims there.

Having absolutely NOTHING to do with the europeans who moved there
after the war.

Your point seems pointless. The land in question has been occupied
simultaneously by different peoples since before "biblical" times, some
"native born," and some who emigrated. Oh, and most of those "Europeans"
are long dead, as are the self-described Palestinians who decided to
pick up and leave shortly after the UN recognized the modern state of
Israel.

It's not as if the "Europeans" and their descendants did there what
white 'Merikans did to the "native" population here, eh?

i don't think there's anything behind your objections than the price of
oil. It's all about $$$ to you...that's obvious from your history of
posts. If there weren't oil in the Middle East (except for Israel), you
wouldn't give a flying fuch about the so-called Palestinians.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

BAR[_2_]

In article , says...

On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 07:50:50 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 12/22/13, 1:22 AM, wrote:

No I just don't have your simpleminded view of things.

You write a 40 line dialog explaining why you think the European
refugees had the RIGHT to invade Palestine and then you deny it
happened. That is simple minded.

Really? There have been Jews in that part of the Middle East for
thousands of years, long before there were Muslims there.

Having absolutely NOTHING to do with the europeans who moved there
after the war.

Why do you hate European's?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Scalia drops bombshell...	F.O.A.D.	General	7	March 30th 13 02:42 PM
OT Duck, duck....goosed!	JimH	General	1	January 30th 06 04:21 PM
Ot Curling dynasty over?	Don White	General	6	February 27th 05 05:36 AM
If it walks like a liberal duck and spends like a liberal duck	Vito	ASA	10	December 7th 04 06:58 PM
AUTHOR KITTY KELLEY PREPARES 'COUP DE GRACE' FOR GEORGE BUSH DYNASTY	Jim	General	1	September 6th 04 10:54 PM

Menu

About Us