Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jcky who wrote (29334)	5/12/2002 5:27:24 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Well, at least you are frank about the Israelis being colonialists. There are lots of border disputes in the world, that doesn't make the parties into "colonialists". Israel is not a colony. If the Arabs managed to win the next war and conquer Israel and establish Palestine "from the river to the sea" as they have said is their goal, will they become "colonialists"? Just a thought.

To: jcky who wrote (29334)	5/12/2002 6:53:24 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

frank about the Israelis being colonialists. No, no, no, no. That won't fly from what I said, Icky.

To: jcky who wrote (29334)	5/12/2002 9:28:37 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Well, at least you are frank about the Israelis being colonialists Just as frank as admitting that the Arabs are colonialists of the middle east (ourside of the Arabian peninsula). They colonized the entire region, spreading their culture and their religion as far as Moorish Spain and the Balkans. And if the Palestinians are truly "descendants" of the Philistines, they are colonialists too.. Afterall, the Philistines were a sea-faring nation... So what you have to decide is how far back we want to go when deciding who's a native and who's a colonialist. Hawk