So, what you are saying is that rather than fight Israel
|
So, what you are saying is that rather than fight Israel |
|
Posted by confederate jew on January 31, 19102 at 17:57:11:
In Reply to: jordan attacked the facist israeli piggys cause they are piggys posted by they didn't let them in because they on January 31, 19102 at 16:07:01:
to get their land back, or let their people return to their country of origin,
Jordan basically said "fuck you" to their own people now living inside New
Israel after the war, as a result of a war Jordan started.
Jordan not only started the war, then lost the war, then failed to protect its
own people after loosing the war, but shut its borders to ITS OWN PEOPLE -
essentially allowing the victors of the unprovoked war do what they please with
these expatriated Jordanians.
How cowardly!
How utterly pathetic and weak of a nation to screw its own citizens after
picking a fight and loosing the war. And even Miss Piggy acknowledges that
this is the core root of the strife that now exists between Israel and the
expatriated Jordanians.
A nation that tosses its citizens to the victors of a war that it started is a
shamefull nation, and has absolutely no right whatsoever to tell Israel what it
can and cannot do to these expatriated Jordanians. The solution is simple,
Jordan can open its borders and let its people return, or shut up. Jordan't
treatment OF ITS OWN CITIZENS is 100 times worse than what any Israeli has done
to them.
I can think of no other country, in this world, or through out history, that
wouldn't allow its own citizens return after a war. The Palestinian's anger is
misdirected - they should be furious with Jordan and patriotic toward Israel.
But instead, they have chosen to rekindle a war long ago started and lost by
pathetic Jordan.
Both Jordan and its expatriates are getting exactly what they have begged for.
:they would be giving up their land...they dont depise palestinians that just
:your zionazi piggy wet dream...israel is not only a threat to the ME its a
:threat to the world and will be dealt with accordingly :) got that piggy?
::1. Why Jordan attacked Israel together with Syria and Egypt;
::2. Why, when Jordan lost the war, it didn't allow its citizens living on
land
::seized by the Israelis back into their country, shutting their gates on their
::own citizens; and
::3. Why their own people secretly despise "Palestinians" and are quietly
::greatful not to have a large majority of them inside their borders any longer.
::4. Please, Mr. Hishmeh, tell us about the "trouble" the remaining
:Palestinians
::in Jordan cause for non-Palestinian Jordanians.
::OR ARE YOU AFFRAID TO SPEAK THE TRUTH!
::
::: http://www.jordantimes.com/Wed/opinion/opinion2.htm
:::
:::'A dose of sober-mindedness'
:::By George S. Hishmeh
:::
:::
:::WASHINGTON — These are heady days for George W. Bush. The American president
:::must feel intoxicated with the praise he has been given at home for his
swift
:::success in Afghanistan, where the American-led war has led to the ouster of
::the
:::extremist Taleban regime and the dissipation of Osama Ben Laden's Al Qaeda.
::And
:::Hamid Karzai, the new appreciative leader in Kabul, was here for the State
of
:::the Union address, always an occasion marked by abundant patriotism,
:::exaggerated achievements and promises.
:::The distracters, however, may point out that the Taleban's Mullah Omar or Al
:::Qaeda's Ben Laden are still at large. Or, more to the point, this
celebratory
:::occasion in Washington has been marred by the downward spiralling of the
:::Palestinian-Israeli war of attrition which saw, for the first time, a woman
:::suicide bomber who was a university student.
:::Yet, President Bush continues to mix apples and oranges in his fight against
:::international terrorism after the horrific events of last September in New
::York
:::City, Washington and the fields of Pennsylvania. He and his vice president,
:::Dick Cheney, lambasted the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, for failing to
:::make “a 100 per cent good-faith effort to put an end to terrorism”, without
:::once recognising the dilapidating effect of the Israeli occupation.
President
:::Bush went a step further and accused Arafat of “enhancing terror”, and
:pressed
:::him to accept responsibility for the arms-smuggling operation. Talk has been
:::rife here that the US may even sever its ties with the Palestinian
:leadership.
:::The single-mindedness of the American president and his unabashed support of
:::the hawkish Israeli government has puzzled many observers here. An
intriguing
:::report circulated by the Religion News Service may shed new light on this
:::mystery.
:::There are an estimated 98 million Christian evangelicals in the United
:States,
:::but of concern here is its sub-group, known as Christian Zionists. They
::believe
:::that Jews are God's chosen people and have a divine deed to their contested
:::land, in accordance with a covenant described in the first book of the
Bible.
:::But Christian Zionism is about more than private belief. “Its `anything for
:::Israel' theology has the potential to affect US foreign policy in the same
:way
:::that the Christian Right has influenced (US) domestic issues through
:political
:::pressure,” the lengthy feature, written by Mark O'Keefe, pointed out.
:::“One intriguing question, posed frequently in Israeli government and US
:::evangelical circles,” O'Keefe continued, “is whether President Bush, who has
:::been outspoken in his evangelical beliefs, privately holds Christian Zionist
:::views.”
:::“It's one of the common explanations (of) ... why and how Bush is
sympathetic
:::to Israel and its cause,” Moshe Fox of the Israeli embassy admitted to
:::O'Keefe. “I haven't had a chance to talk to the president about this, but
:that
:::view is out there, and it is quite common.”
:::The White House would not comment on whether Bush's religious beliefs might
:::affect his actions towards Israel, insisting that he makes policy
:::decisions “based on policy factors”.
:::Bush's single-track approach does not sit well with many former officials.
:For
:::one, Robert Malley, who was special assistant for Arab-Israeli affairs in
:::President Clinton's White House, has described current US policy vis-ý-vis
:the
:::Palestinian-Israeli conflict as a “recipe for catastrophe”.
:::He wrote in The New York Times last Friday: “Of course, the United States is
:::justified in pressuring Chairman Arafat to act against Palestinian
:terrorists.
:::But so, too, must it admonish Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to cease those
:::policies that inflame the Palestinian public and paralyse its security
::service:
:::the targeted assassinations, home demolitions, suffocating closures and
:::creeping reoccupation.”
:::He added: “By his actions ... Mr Sharon has done all in his power to make it
:::unfeasible for (the Palestinians) to meet their obligations.”
:::The point here is that the more the US and Israel humiliate the Palestinian
:::leader, now confined to his headquarters compound in Ramallah, the more the
:::Palestinian people are likely to rally to his support. In other words,
:::dismissing the Palestinian leader as “irrelevant”, a point now adopted by
:some
:::key American politicians, only underlines the empty-headedness of these
::Israeli
:::copycats.
:::One is tempted to echo the remarks of the Swedish foreign minister, Anna
::Lindh,
:::who described Bush's policy as “stupid” and “crazy”. Regardless, isn't it
::quite
:::obvious that neither the Bush administration's threats, which in its latest
:::manifestation has only yielded some foul and inelegant language against the
:::Palestinian leader from the new American peace envoy, nor the Israeli stress
::on
:::security above everything else has produced a workable solution. This Israel
:::rendition has actually camouflaged Zionist expansionist objectives; since
:::assuming office a year ago, Sharon has reportedly established 26 illegal
:::settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
:::In their upcoming get-together, the fourth in a year, both Bush and Sharon
::need
:::a good dose of sober-mindedness or else hell may break loose.
:::