To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (162160 ) 5/16/2005 3:20:22 AM From: marcos Read Replies (1) | Respond to Your argument here is going like this - suppose there was a chinese family living in Jerusalem then, and who knows, there may have been, well let's say we prove that there was, and therefore now the chinese have an absolute land claim that takes priority over anyone else ... you'll agree that's ridiculous using 'chinese' as example, yet clearly you think it works just fine as long as zionists get to employ the 'logic'can't just say "the foreigners came to dispossess the indigenous" anymore. ' - if you ever decide to speak the truth you will yourself say exactly that, Nadine, because that is exactly what happened .... there was robbery here with clear malice aforethought, hundreds of zionist statements can prove that by themselves ... the fact that there were a few per cent of jews present, and that zionists may have declined to rob them too, does not justify their robbing of the great majority who were arab-speaking en.wikipedia.org cactus48.com cactus48.com en.wikipedia.org
