The isreal/palestine debate

[Napoleon Ier]

No, you're both mixed up. You're thinking of the Franks, who represent roughly 0.5% of our gene pool. France is still very much Gay.

Well you've certainly succeded in convincing me...

Remind me again of your age Mustard?

Doesn't he claim he's 14?

Really? I thought he said he was 12, but then given his contribustions to the hot and sexy thread, only as a joke? I dunno...

[greenoaks]

you are right Napoleon Ier, it was the Franks i was thinking of.
and it is my understanding that gauls were celtic tribes.

does anyone know if there is a difference in appearance between those of gaul and frankish heritage ? ie. height, stockiness, a particular hair/eye colour is more common in one or the other.

[Guiscard]

you are right Napoleon Ier, it was the Franks i was thinking of.
and it is my understanding that gauls were celtic tribes.

does anyone know if there is a difference in appearance between those of gaul and frankish heritage ? ie. height, stockiness, a particular hair/eye colour is more common in one or the other.

Don't take any answer Nappy gives you as related to fact or the real world at any point.

[Dekloren]

Deklorean, you're an idiot. The God of Abraham, Yahweh, arose from a tribal sun god in Mesopotamia over 4000 years ago. The nation of Israel grew out of this tribal faith and migrated to the land of Canaan sometime between 2000 BCE and 1250 BCE. Escape from the slavery of egypt and subsequent conquest and settlement of the land of Canaan occurred between 1250 BCE and 1000 BCE. The era of kings (David, Saul, that whole crowd) was from 1000 BCE to 587/6 BCE, during which time the Jews BUILT Jerusalem. Do you think that maybe the lack of a Jewish nation called Israel ~2000 years ago, might have a little something to do with the fact that the ROMANS conquered the holy land in 70 BCE?!?

No link??

[Napoleon Ier]

you are right Napoleon Ier, it was the Franks i was thinking of.
and it is my understanding that gauls were celtic tribes.

does anyone know if there is a difference in appearance between those of gaul and frankish heritage ? ie. height, stockiness, a particular hair/eye colour is more common in one or the other.

Don't take any answer Nappy gives you as related to fact or the real world at any point.

Guiscard is straight.

[got tonkaed]

you are right Napoleon Ier, it was the Franks i was thinking of.
and it is my understanding that gauls were celtic tribes.

does anyone know if there is a difference in appearance between those of gaul and frankish heritage ? ie. height, stockiness, a particular hair/eye colour is more common in one or the other.

Don't take any answer Nappy gives you as related to fact or the real world at any point.

Guiscard is straight.

ill admit, i had a chuckle.

[Colossus]

Deklorean, I know this idea may seem very very foreign to you, but I got my information from a BOOK. It's called 'Religious Traditions of the World' edited by H. Byron Earhart with the section on Judaism by Michael A. Fishbane. I know the concept of finding information in a reputable source may seem odd when you can find any piece of bullshit you want on the internet, but I have a strong aversion to supporting my viewpoints with information whose source I do not know and cannot verify. I realize that you base your entire internet existence on spouting bullshit from whatever websites you can find from Google, so forgive me for not being able to hyperlink you to the information. If you are really interested to see the source, you might actually have to try going to the library.

[Dekloren]

Oh, because someone sold it, makes it viable?

I think the uncensored, unedited information superhighway is more viable than someone trying to make a buck.

Also, what's the difference between regurgitating something you read in a book, or something read on the net?

[Colossus]

Are you fucking serious? You are a complete fucktard. This is history textbook. The timeline is based on historical evidence. Michael Fishbane is a professor at the University of Chicago and is an imminent scholar of Judaism.

[got tonkaed]

Deklorean, I know this idea may seem very very foreign to you, but I got my information from a BOOK. It's called 'Religious Traditions of the World' edited by H. Byron Earhart with the section on Judaism by Michael A. Fishbane. I know the concept of finding information in a reputable source may seem odd when you can find any piece of bullshit you want on the internet, but I have a strong aversion to supporting my viewpoints with information whose source I do not know and cannot verify. I realize that you base your entire internet existence on spouting bullshit from whatever websites you can find from Google, so forgive me for not being able to hyperlink you to the information. If you are really interested to see the source, you might actually have to try going to the library.

ironically...you can read it online....

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1UnZOgbAtFsC&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=%27Religious+Traditions+of+the+World%27+edited+by+H.+Byron+Earhart+&ots=T6k0X7GFHS&sig=ZjawOy-cLTdoTwBVc24y2_MwDBQ#PPA332,M1

[Colossus]

cool. thanks, gt. maybe now that deklorean can read it online, he might actually believe it.

[got tonkaed]

cool. thanks, gt.

i was going to throw down and claim that i could read it on my uni account and that you couldnt....but when i found out i couldnt read it at the uni account...i was compelled to see if google could, and sure enough

google > my school

edit I fastposted you!

[Dekloren]

Are you fucking serious? You are a complete fucktard. This is history textbook. The timeline is based on historical evidence. Michael Fishbane is a professor at the University of Chicago and is an imminent scholar of Judaism.

Steven Jones is a professor at BYU and says 9/11 was an inside job.

What's your point?

Maybe, just maybe I will take a look at it.

Maybe.

Also, what's the difference between regurgitating something you read in a book, or something read on the net?

[Guiscard]

Deklorean, you're an idiot. The God of Abraham, Yahweh, arose from a tribal sun god in Mesopotamia over 4000 years ago. The nation of Israel grew out of this tribal faith and migrated to the land of Canaan sometime between 2000 BCE and 1250 BCE. Escape from the slavery of egypt and subsequent conquest and settlement of the land of Canaan occurred between 1250 BCE and 1000 BCE. The era of kings (David, Saul, that whole crowd) was from 1000 BCE to 587/6 BCE, during which time the Jews BUILT Jerusalem. Do you think that maybe the lack of a Jewish nation called Israel ~2000 years ago, might have a little something to do with the fact that the ROMANS conquered the holy land in 70 BCE?!?

No link??

All of this is widely available in any history textbook. None of it is disputed by anyone, other than the Yahweh root.

[Colossus]

Ever heard the phrase, 'Believe only half of what you read'? You should ALWAYS be careful about believing what you read, whether it's in a book or on the internet. The source should always be scrutinized. When bringing up an argument related to the history of Judaism, I think that any reasoning human being would be able to recognize the difference in reliability between a history textbook written by someone who has studied the subject for years and years and is well respected and well published versus an old map gotten from Google. If the difference between the reliability of these sources isn't obvious to you, I can't help ya.

[suggs]

Deklorean, you're an idiot. The God of Abraham, Yahweh, arose from a tribal sun god in Mesopotamia over 4000 years ago. The nation of Israel grew out of this tribal faith and migrated to the land of Canaan sometime between 2000 BCE and 1250 BCE. Escape from the slavery of egypt and subsequent conquest and settlement of the land of Canaan occurred between 1250 BCE and 1000 BCE. The era of kings (David, Saul, that whole crowd) was from 1000 BCE to 587/6 BCE, during which time the Jews BUILT Jerusalem. Do you think that maybe the lack of a Jewish nation called Israel ~2000 years ago, might have a little something to do with the fact that the ROMANS conquered the holy land in 70 BCE?!?

No link??

All of this is widely available in any history textbook. None of it is disputed by anyone, other than the Yahweh root.

Yes, the histpry is true, (Although just because something is in a history book, doen make it true eg Fritz Fischer)

Still, the Jews shoukdnt be in Israel-they have no right to it.
I'm afraid being kicked out by the Romans doent really count anymore.
The Jews kicking the Palestinians out IS INEXCUSABLE-because it happened relatively recently in enlightened times.

[suggs]

Fucking Truman. He had to win his election didn't he?
Twat.
Once again, domestic US politics fucks the world over, cheers for that.
Still, at least Harry boy got the Jewish vote and won-thats what counts.

[Guiscard]

Are you fucking serious? You are a complete fucktard. This is history textbook. The timeline is based on historical evidence. Michael Fishbane is a professor at the University of Chicago and is an imminent scholar of Judaism.

Steven Jones is a professor at BYU and says 9/11 was an inside job.

What's your point?

Maybe, just maybe I will take a look at it.

Maybe.

Also, what's the difference between regurgitating something you read in a book, or something read on the net?

Because primarily the Net is not subject to scholarly peer review and the real Academic world is. I'm a historian. If I publish a load of crap and lies about the Middle Ages then I'm gonna get ripped to shreds in the journals, IF they consider my book even worthy of review, and then I'm pretty much guaranteed not to get a publishing deal again. Plus, I lose the respect of my colleagues, academic links break down, potentially lose my job... I've known it to happen to people before.

[Neoteny]

Are you fucking serious? You are a complete fucktard. This is history textbook. The timeline is based on historical evidence. Michael Fishbane is a professor at the University of Chicago and is an imminent scholar of Judaism.

Steven Jones is a professor at BYU and says 9/11 was an inside job.

What's your point?

Maybe, just maybe I will take a look at it.

Maybe.

Also, what's the difference between regurgitating something you read in a book, or something read on the net?

Because primarily the Net is not subject to scholarly peer review and the real Academic world is. I'm a historian. If I publish a load of crap and lies about the Middle Ages then I'm gonna get ripped to shreds in the journals, IF they consider my book even worthy of review, and then I'm pretty much guaranteed not to get a publishing deal again. Plus, I lose the respect of my colleagues, academic links break down, potentially lose my job... I've known it to happen to people before.

Something tells me Dekloren might enjoy Ben Stein's upcoming feature presentation...

[comic boy]

Deklorean, you're an idiot. The God of Abraham, Yahweh, arose from a tribal sun god in Mesopotamia over 4000 years ago. The nation of Israel grew out of this tribal faith and migrated to the land of Canaan sometime between 2000 BCE and 1250 BCE. Escape from the slavery of egypt and subsequent conquest and settlement of the land of Canaan occurred between 1250 BCE and 1000 BCE. The era of kings (David, Saul, that whole crowd) was from 1000 BCE to 587/6 BCE, during which time the Jews BUILT Jerusalem. Do you think that maybe the lack of a Jewish nation called Israel ~2000 years ago, might have a little something to do with the fact that the ROMANS conquered the holy land in 70 BCE?!?

No link??

All of this is widely available in any history textbook. None of it is disputed by anyone, other than the Yahweh root.

Yes, the histpry is true, (Although just because something is in a history book, doen make it true eg Fritz Fischer)

Still, the Jews shoukdnt be in Israel-they have no right to it.
I'm afraid being kicked out by the Romans doent really count anymore.
The Jews kicking the Palestinians out IS INEXCUSABLE-because it happened relatively recently in enlightened times.

Suggs

Be so good to elaborate when and where this happened, would it be 1967 ( when Egypt kicked out the Peacekeeping force and announced it was going to drive Israel into the sea) or 1973 ( when Israel was attacked first ) or some other time ?

[Guiscard]

Be so good to elaborate when and where this happened, would it be 1967 ( when Egypt kicked out the Peacekeeping force and announced it was going to drive Israel into the sea) or 1973 ( when Israel was attacked first ) or some other time ?

Don't tell him, Pike!

Of all the pointless internet arguments, this is the one we've avoided thus far. I think it'd be better for all of us to let that remain the case, eh? Both 'sides' are wrong, both are right. It's an issue which generally hinges entirely on personal opinion, and ends in accusations of Islamaphobia / Anti-Semitism...

[Napoleon Ier]

Be so good to elaborate when and where this happened, would it be 1967 ( when Egypt kicked out the Peacekeeping force and announced it was going to drive Israel into the sea) or 1973 ( when Israel was attacked first ) or some other time ?

Don't tell him, Pike!

Of all the pointless internet arguments, this is the one we've avoided thus far. I think it'd be better for all of us to let that remain the case, eh? Both 'sides' are wrong, both are right. It's an issue which generally hinges entirely on personal opinion, and ends in accusations of Islamaphobia / Anti-Semitism...

How dare you, I'm no islamaphobe.

[suggs]

The anti-semitism jibe is LUDICROUS.

Its like accusing a Frenchman of being "Anti-German" in 1940-44.
The Germans had no right to be in France, and so were kicked out.
The Jews have no right to "Israel", so they should be kicked out.
Simple.

(and likewise, the Brits should be out of N. Ireland).

Next.

[Neoteny]

Be so good to elaborate when and where this happened, would it be 1967 ( when Egypt kicked out the Peacekeeping force and announced it was going to drive Israel into the sea) or 1973 ( when Israel was attacked first ) or some other time ?

Don't tell him, Pike!

Of all the pointless internet arguments, this is the one we've avoided thus far. I think it'd be better for all of us to let that remain the case, eh? Both 'sides' are wrong, both are right. It's an issue which generally hinges entirely on personal opinion, and ends in accusations of Islamaphobia / Anti-Semitism...

How dare you, I'm no islamaphobe.

Heh, I think we all have better words for each other than islamaphobe and anti-semitic.

[Guiscard]

The anti-semitism jibe is LUDICROUS.

Its like accusing a Frenchman of being "Anti-German" in 1940-44.
The Germans had no right to be in France, and so were kicked out.
The Jews have no right to "Israel", so they should be kicked out.
Simple.

(and likewise, the Brits should be out of N. Ireland).

Next.

Not that I disagree, but just to play the Devil's advocate... If they have no right to Israel they really have no right to anywhere! I would contend that I think it was appropriate that the Jews have some form of state, and that unrestricted immigration to, say, Palestine would lead to more trouble in the long run than 'giving' them territory 'legally' (note the ''s). Everything after that? Out of order, but still...