SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: marcos who wrote (161160)4/27/2005 5:18:49 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
In 1917 this all changed, with Balfour's letter to Rothschild being taken by some zionists to mean the brits were handing over the lands of the indigenous to them

The shift wasn't nearly as one sided as your post would seem to indicate. As for exlusionary rules about which ethnic or religious groups the land could be sold back to. They are unfair, often a bad idea, and in a number of ways just wrong, but they don't amount to taking the land.

nd it's 'country' in the sense of 'region demarcated by specific conditions'

Which again is little different than just using the word "land". When someone sayd "taking your country", they normally don't mean "taking your region demarcated by specific conditions". It is true that country can be defined that way but in the context of the way you used the term it usually implies an actual country, at least a "nation", and usually a "nation-state". You could have said "taking your land" without throwing in the distracting implication.

Tim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News