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: michael97123 who wrote (160916)	4/22/2005 4:57:57 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

One of your best posts ever -- have a great time with the grandkids.

To: michael97123 who wrote (160916)	4/22/2005 4:59:59 PM
From: marcos	Respond to of 281500

Historical context did not begin in 1947, mike ... context goes way back, we cannot know how far, the records thin out ... we can break it into knowable sections, for instance the context of zionist invasion of Palestine, yet even here we cannot know when exactly the idea was conceived ... of physical invasion on the ground we have a year, 1882, probably a specific day, possibly the hour of day even, still it would presumably have spent time in a planning stage ... and then, as for context of the tendency of our species to defend lands we inhabit, that likely stretches way back into the mists of time, we cannot nail it down even to millennium .... murky, but still integral part of context, isn't it Please to note that it is my tentative belief, pending evidence to the contrary, that 1882 preceded 1947 and is not contemporary with that year, in case Nadine accuses me of saying it is .... have a good weekend ... much later ... cheers ps - never have i said that any human being has made no mistakes ... maybe you have me confused with someone else, we can work on that some other week

To: michael97123 who wrote (160916)	4/22/2005 6:15:24 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

Yup, good post mike. When Zionists come, buying up unsellable wasteland, bringing jobs & money, that's an "invasion". When Turks come with an army and do ethnic clearing or even genocide, that's not worth bothering about. Not that anyone is prejudiced against the Zionists! They just hold them to a higher standard. A MUCH higher standard. We've all heard it before. When the hypocrisy is pointed out, they usually react by citing an unwritten grandfather clause: colonialism started before 1850, that's okay. If only the Zionists had gotten their act together a century earlier, they'd be home free! In vain you point out that the Turks invaded (as in REALLY invaded, with an army) northern Cyrpus in 1974, ethnically cleared off the Greeks, declared the Republic of Northern Cyprus, and imported Turks from the mainland to fill up the gaps. And this, boys and girls, is regarded by the UN, the EU, and entire world as a done deal, unchangeable. Have you EVER heard ANYBODY call the Turkish inhabitants of northern Cyrpus "settlers" or regard their stay as temporary? Anybody? The usual answer to this point is silence. There really is no answer but to agree with Bibi Netanyahu's formulation: "The world has three sets of standards. One for dictatorships. One for democracies. And one for Israel."