Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says

Full story: Worcester Telegram & Gazette

TEHRAN, Iran- Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday said the world would witness the destruction of Israel soon, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

Comments (Page 1,750)

Showing posts 34,981 - 35,000 of36,079
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40183
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
And WHO made plans to create Isreal in the first place? Don't you think that is worked also?
Why blame the second party and not the first party?
It proves that Isreal was the "Root cause" of the problem does it not? Not the Cold war!! QED!!
Faisel an Arab leader sat down with Weitzman in 1919 Paris Peace Conference and created the Paris peace agreement which would have created a Jewish state on all of Palestine. This included Jordan, S.Syria, Golan, Israel, WB, Gaza, and S.Lebanon. On condition that the British followed through on Arab autonomy. Disputes between the Europeans and Arabs led this agreement never being fulfilled.

Israel existing has nothing to do with the other dozen countries of the region continuously going to war with each other.

What about the country where you live which was taken over by Wahabists in the 1920's?

What right do Muslims have to Mecca? Before Islam there were many groups there. After Islam they mostly disappeared leading up to todays racist policies by Saudi Arabia.

Are you able to have a normal conversation in English?? Can you not read properly. This is the third time in the past day where you make false claims about what I wrote.

I never said the Cold War was the root cause of the problem. i believe it is Political Islam and the expulsion of the Ottomans from the area. As soon as Muslims in the region had the freedom to push their extremism they did. Once the Allies left they reverted to barbaric acts.

I suppose the fact that the Christian population in the region going from 20% 2-5% in a century is the Jews fault also and not the Mulims persecution?
rio

Bromley, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40184
Nov 18, 2013
 
nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
Faisel an Arab leader sat down with Weitzman in 1919 Paris Peace Conference and created the Paris peace agreement which would have created a Jewish state on all of Palestine. This included Jordan, S.Syria, Golan, Israel, WB, Gaza, and S.Lebanon. On condition that the British followed through on Arab autonomy. Disputes between the Europeans and Arabs led this agreement never being fulfilled.
Wrong!
The Middle East future had already been decided between France and Britain by the Sikes-Picot Agreement that drew arbitrary borders and created artificial states to satisfy the 2 colonialist countries.
Faycal had never a say in it, and was kept in ignorance.
The Paris Peace Conference was merely to rubber stamp that decision.
I believe that the US president had great reservation about the project, seeing it as a tinderbox.
Faycal was bribed into accepting the deal: two of his sons becoming kings of new countries Jordan and Iraq - and himself proclaimed king of Arabia (he was previously Emir of Hejaz).

France had Syria and Lebanon; Britain had Iraq and Cisjordan and influence over Arabia. Palestine was supposed to be administered by the newly-formed League of Nations.

The idea of a Jewish state was not mooted at the Paris Conference; Britain started having second thought about it, in spite of the Zionist lobby in Britain and Europe. Britain accepted the League of Nations Mandate over Palestine for 20 years.
rio

Bromley, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40185
Nov 18, 2013
 
nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
What right do Muslims have to Mecca? Before Islam there were many groups there.
What right do Jews have to Jerusalem or Palestine?

Before Judaism there were many groups there.
rio

Bromley, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40186
Nov 18, 2013
 
nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
What about the country where you live which was taken over by Wahabists in the 1920's?
That was a regime change within the same nation, and nothing to do with the ethnic cleansing exacted by the Zionists on the Arabs.

Emir Faycal of the Hejaz was made King of Arabia after WWI and was supported by the British Foreign Office.
Ibn Saud was a wahanite prince from Bahrain who gathered support from the British Indian Office to challenge this.

In fact, the fraternal war was a conflict conducted by proxy by civil servants in two rival British government departments.

King Faycal had served the British and was now expendable. But the Brits were punished for their betrayal; once in power, Ibn Saud expelled all the British advisers from his country and invited the Americans! ARAMCO came next ...
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40187
Nov 18, 2013
 
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong!
The Middle East future had already been decided between France and Britain by the Sikes-Picot Agreement that drew arbitrary borders and created artificial states to satisfy the 2 colonialist countries.
Faycal had never a say in it, and was kept in ignorance.
The Paris Peace Conference was merely to rubber stamp that decision.
I believe that the US president had great reservation about the project, seeing it as a tinderbox.
Faycal was bribed into accepting the deal: two of his sons becoming kings of new countries Jordan and Iraq - and himself proclaimed king of Arabia (he was previously Emir of Hejaz).
France had Syria and Lebanon; Britain had Iraq and Cisjordan and influence over Arabia. Palestine was supposed to be administered by the newly-formed League of Nations.
The idea of a Jewish state was not mooted at the Paris Conference; Britain started having second thought about it, in spite of the Zionist lobby in Britain and Europe. Britain accepted the League of Nations Mandate over Palestine for 20 years.
Sickes-Picot agreement only spoke of part of the region which didn't include Palestine; this is clear from the correspondence. The league of nations had the last word on the borders.
Saudi Arabia being taken by the Wahabis changed things also.

The US president, Congress and Senate of the time signed off on the Mandate for Palestine.

The Paris peace deal wasn't kept anyways as nearly 90% of the land was taken from the Palestinian Mandate.

Your claim of bribery makes no sense as Faisels son was given the majority of the land his father agreed was for the Jews. According to your logic Faisel accepted an agreement to get the British to give his son most of the land which was for the Jews according to the agreement?

Britain didn't accept the Mandate and did everything to stop it. The first white paper restricting Jewish immigration, which was against the terms of the mandate, was in 1921.
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40188
Nov 18, 2013
 
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
What right do Jews have to Jerusalem or Palestine?
Before Judaism there were many groups there.
Firstly the Mandate for Palestine.
Secondly the historic connection.
Thirdly the fact that Jews have been a majority in the city for 150 years and before this the Old City was Jerusalem. Over the past 150 years the area has been built up to todays Jerusalem but back than it was a tiny ancient city mostly resided in by Jews.
Lastly it is the center of Judaism and is throughout Jewish prayers, songs and history.

Who knows what really happened back in the days the Jews may have been converts of those who lived there before.

Interesting how again you don't answer by ask questions instead.

So why do Muslims have a right to Mecca but Jews don't to Jerusalem?
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40189
Nov 18, 2013
 
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
That was a regime change within the same nation, and nothing to do with the ethnic cleansing exacted by the Zionists on the Arabs.
Emir Faycal of the Hejaz was made King of Arabia after WWI and was supported by the British Foreign Office.
Ibn Saud was a wahanite prince from Bahrain who gathered support from the British Indian Office to challenge this.
In fact, the fraternal war was a conflict conducted by proxy by civil servants in two rival British government departments.
King Faycal had served the British and was now expendable. But the Brits were punished for their betrayal; once in power, Ibn Saud expelled all the British advisers from his country and invited the Americans! ARAMCO came next ...
Never claimed otherwise and the Arab nations carried out a real ethnic cleansing of the Jews where 1,000,00 Jews from throughout the region where ethnically cleansed including Jerusalem, West Bank and Gaza.

How was it internal if Ibd Saud came from Bahrain or do you mean he came from the area which is todays Bahrain?
rio

Bromley, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40190
Nov 18, 2013
 
nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
How was it internal if Ibd Saud came from Bahrain or do you mean he came from the area which is todays Bahrain?
Ibn Saud's father had been chased from Arabia and took refuse in Bahrain. Ibn Saud returned, reasserted his right in his tribe and took to conquer the rest of Arabia.
rio

Bromley, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40191
Nov 18, 2013
 
nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
Firstly the Mandate for Palestine.
Secondly the historic connection.
Thirdly the fact that Jews have been a majority in the city for 150 years and before this the Old City was Jerusalem. Over the past 150 years the area has been built up to todays Jerusalem but back than it was a tiny ancient city mostly resided in by Jews.
Lastly it is the center of Judaism and is throughout Jewish prayers, songs and history.
Who knows what really happened back in the days the Jews may have been converts of those who lived there before.
Interesting how again you don't answer by ask questions instead.
So why do Muslims have a right to Mecca but Jews don't to Jerusalem?
Before Judaism started, there were other tribes in the region.
So how come the Jews claim to have the right to Jerusalem.

You dismissed the claim that Mecca belongs to the Muslims, so I do the same for Jerusalem.

You will also probably refute that Judaism was created to mimic Zoroastrianism, and that the Jews took example from the Persians in adopting a monotheist religion.
rio

Bromley, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40192
Nov 18, 2013
 
nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
Your claim of bribery makes no sense as Faisels son was given the majority of the land his father agreed was for the Jews. According to your logic Faisel accepted an agreement to get the British to give his son most of the land which was for the Jews according to the agreement?
.
Until the end of the war, Faycal was under the impression that his kingdom would include ALL the Arab land liberated from the Ottoman Empire, and never told that it would be carved in several different countries.
It was, after all, an Arab army under his banner that took Damascus after having routed the Turks all along from Aqhaba.

Emir Faycal was put in front of the "fait accompli" after the war when the British were briefing him for his appearance at the Paris Peace Conference. Faycal became aware of the split of Arab land and the proposal to place his sons as kings of Cisjordan and Iraq, to take Syria, Lebanon and Palestine out of his control.
It was a "take it or leave it" proposition and he had no choice, but to accept.
Faycal would certainly never have allowed part of Arab land to become a Jewish state, that I am sure of!!!
You should read T.E. Lawrence's book about that period. Allenby wrote a book about it as well.

All you are interested is in justifying the existence of Israel, not to respect the historical facts.

As for the British, they always considered that Palestine was a land where Jews and Arabs should COHABIT, and never a country to be dominated by Zionists.

In fact, under the mandate, the Brits tried to limit Jewish immigration, so that both sides stay equals. Of course, the Zionists used violent methods to oppose that arrangement and started the ethnic cleansing of Arabs, killing some Brits in the process.
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40193
Nov 18, 2013
 
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Before Judaism started, there were other tribes in the region.
So how come the Jews claim to have the right to Jerusalem.
You dismissed the claim that Mecca belongs to the Muslims, so I do the same for Jerusalem.
You will also probably refute that Judaism was created to mimic Zoroastrianism, and that the Jews took example from the Persians in adopting a monotheist religion.
I don't dismiss the claim Muslims have a right to Mecca but Jews have a right to Jerusalem.

Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem for 150 years. Jerusalem of today outside the old city has ALL been built in the past 150 years and Jews have almost continuously been the majority since then.

I don't claim to know what happened that far back in history. I have my opinions. Interesting though I have never heard that before. I only refute what I know to be lie or distortion. This I have no idea so can't really comment.
rio

Bromley, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40194
Nov 18, 2013
 
nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem for 150 years. Jerusalem of today outside the old city has ALL been built in the past 150 years and Jews have almost continuously been the majority since then.
.
Before, Jerusalem was a Muslim town, and before that a Christian town after the Jews deserted it.
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40195
Nov 18, 2013
 
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Until the end of the war, Faycal was under the impression that his kingdom would include ALL the Arab land liberated from the Ottoman Empire, and never told that it would be carved in several different countries.
It was, after all, an Arab army under his banner that took Damascus after having routed the Turks all along from Aqhaba.
Emir Faycal was put in front of the "fait accompli" after the war when the British were briefing him for his appearance at the Paris Peace Conference. Faycal became aware of the split of Arab land and the proposal to place his sons as kings of Cisjordan and Iraq, to take Syria, Lebanon and Palestine out of his control.
It was a "take it or leave it" proposition and he had no choice, but to accept.
Faycal would certainly never have allowed part of Arab land to become a Jewish state, that I am sure of!!!
You should read T.E. Lawrence's book about that period. Allenby wrote a book about it as well.
All you are interested is in justifying the existence of Israel, not to respect the historical facts.
As for the British, they always considered that Palestine was a land where Jews and Arabs should COHABIT, and never a country to be dominated by Zionists.
In fact, under the mandate, the Brits tried to limit Jewish immigration, so that both sides stay equals. Of course, the Zionists used violent methods to oppose that arrangement and started the ethnic cleansing of Arabs, killing some Brits in the process.
How could they have decided already when Saudi Arabia was only united in the early 1930's? Didn't the Sikes-Pikot Correspondence make it clear the terms and borders?

Didn't the Arab revolt of 1916-18 fail? What about all the jews who fought on the side of the allies in Palestine?

Why are you so sure Faisel was forced to sign? If so why was he allowed to leave a note at the end clearly stating that if the British and French didn't follow through with their promises than the document was null and void?

I have no problem respecting historical facts or admitting that I am wrong but I need to have a real response from the other side. It is nice to see that you can discuss a bit and seem to know more than I thought you did about the regional history.

I think I have already justified the existence of Israel at least from certain perspectives. I actually started on this forum to dispute the lies posted by Israel haters.

I never claimed that Israel is innocent but why can't Israel haters attack Israel for things it actually does instead of making things up or distorting the situation to push their agenda.

The British tried to keep the Arab majority not keep things equal. They also went against the dictates of the Mandate which called to encourage Jewish immigration to Public land.

MORE LIES FROM YOU.
The indigenous Arabs started the violence and carried out dozens of massacres on Jews before the Jewish militias were created. This is actually why they were created in the first place. The British refused to defend the Jews often aiding the Arabs in their massacres or at the least stopping the Jews from defending themselves.This is how Jews were ethnically cleansed from Old Jerusalem during the War of Independence.

I suppose massacres in Tzfat, Jerusalem, and Hebron in the 1920's were Jews fault?

Why did the British encourage Arab immigration? Why are Palestinians in denial that many came from the surrounding lands?
grave digger

Ozark, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40196
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Before, Jerusalem was a Muslim town, and before that a Christian town after the Jews deserted it.
muslims never owned anything,,,ever,,,they dont even own the rights to the koran,,,the koran is a fictional book wrote from a jewish poet,,,and lost it on his travels and a desert wondering camel farmer found it and started the whole muslim beleif,,,he was yelling at his camel and was trying to say waslum,,,which means water but said muslim cuz he had sand in his mouth,,,and this camel farmers sons were camel farmers by day but desert bandits by night,,,and they heard the word muslim and it started by that,,,3 bandit camel farmers sons,,,one went north and recruted more bandits,,,the 2nd son went south and recruted more bandits,,,and the 3rd son went west and recruted more bandits,,,then they all met in the middle and headed east,,,but the oldest son kept falling down to the ground cuz he was pigeon toed and kept tripping over his own clodhopper feet,,,the 2nd son gave him a rug to fall down on so he would stop getting sand in his eyes,,,nose,,,mouth,,,ears,,, and the whole bunch of bandits started doing the same thing,,,falling down on a rug towerds the east,,,then the 3rd son said,,,f--k them egyptains,,,they build pointy buildings,,,let us muslims build rounded top buildings,,,and you will never guess what the 3 sons names were,,,thats right,,,moe,,,larry and curly,,,all because a jewish poet lost his book of poams in the stupid desert,,,the end,,,the video will be released next week on youtube,,,
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40197
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nutjobs here wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't dismiss the claim Muslims have a right to Mecca but Jews have a right to Jerusalem.
Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem for 150 years. Jerusalem of today outside the old city has ALL been built in the past 150 years and Jews have almost continuously been the majority since then.
I don't claim to know what happened that far back in history. I have my opinions. Interesting though I have never heard that before. I only refute what I know to be lie or distortion. This I have no idea so can't really comment.
You should have the guts to speak white lie in front of every one and we see that you have those guts.

To say that Jews were in "majority" in Jerusalem for past 150 years is the "whitest lie" that any one can speak.

The matter is so new that most people do not need any convincing , but I do not know how brainwashed people get, when they constantly hear one sided propaganda day in and day out.

Jews were "Never" I repeat "Never" in majority since that fateful day in 68 or 70 CE, when they were removed from that city by Roman General Titus.

That was done by Pagan Roman General, but when Roman Empire accepted Christianity in year 330 CE, they did not allow Jews to come back to Jerusalem.

This situation continued till Muslim armies took control of Jerusalem from Byzantine Empire in 650 CE.

From that day till 1967, there was only a "marginal presence" of Jews in Jerusalem and elsewhere in Palestine.

And they have cheek to say that "jews were in majority in Jerusalem for past 150 years".

They might "invent" a new History making industry, to write whatever comes to their minds as "historical facts".

Since: Nov 12

Sydney, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40198
Nov 19, 2013
 
Anxiety belief ambition conclusion, opposed to composure.
Allah was the beginning of epistemological development.
Children come from the conclusion within space , open and closed, only to coexist as function because there is intermittent conclusion, and they become the paradox in the Image of Allah.
When Allah was Singular, He was Him, to accept the conclusion of everything also to be Himself, was the ultimate betrayal, but He did it anyway.
Allah is all that everything is, the Accumulator and the Person of Accumulation.
He satisfied His Desire by acquisition to double cross, what He was to be what He became.
And we are the same conclusion is acquisition.
Space could not satisfy desire, Fate could not satisfy desire, the Random could not do it either.
So how come we can and not them three
Its because we conclude and they don't.

Since: Nov 13

Izmir, Turkey

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40199
Nov 19, 2013
 
It is not a wise thing to make such announcements. Declaring a state completely as evil and enemy and several time clarifying that it will come to end.

When Iran declares that does it mean it will kill all 6 million people in Israel? or only the military personel of Israel? or just the politicians?

Threats are nothing in international relations. During the 6-day-war when the history is searched noone can notice the name "Iran" among the other countries against Israel.

Addition: Israel never made an official declaration like "We will destroy all Iran".

http://irglobal.blogspot.com/
MUQ

Saudi Arabia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40200
Nov 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Iran does not say about massacres of Jews at all. It speaks about end of Zionist state of Isreal.

You can have an end of Isreal, without having a massacre at all.

The world was "used" to no state of Isreal for past 2000 years, what great change would come if the present Zionist state of Isreal is gone from the map?

Jews would be "re-distributed" into the land and live like they were living for past 2000 years.

Why there should be massacre of 6 Million Jews living in Isreal?

It is "Christian friends" of Jews, who have help all records of Massacres of Jews for past 2000 years.

Now they are posing as if "It were Muslims who were doing massacres of Jews, while the Christians were acting like White doves of peace".

People do not know their own histories, there has never been any major Muslim-Jews war for past 1400 years (I mean before that Zionist state of Isreal was created in 1948)
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40201
Nov 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Before, Jerusalem was a Muslim town, and before that a Christian town after the Jews deserted it.
More lies from you. The Jews were there first and last while staying or returning continuously over time.

When did the Jews ever desert Jerusalem?

It was the Christians and Muslims who continuously fought over it massacring the Jews there on a regular basis.

Again you do realize that until 150 years ago Jerusalem was tiny and consisted of the Old City. The Old City was majority Jewish.

So you don't care about majority rights but just Palestinian rights but not Jewish ones.

You spill more each post.
nutjobs here

Kfar Saba, Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40202
Nov 19, 2013
 
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
You should have the guts to speak white lie in front of every one and we see that you have those guts.
To say that Jews were in "majority" in Jerusalem for past 150 years is the "whitest lie" that any one can speak.
The matter is so new that most people do not need any convincing , but I do not know how brainwashed people get, when they constantly hear one sided propaganda day in and day out.
Jews were "Never" I repeat "Never" in majority since that fateful day in 68 or 70 CE, when they were removed from that city by Roman General Titus.
That was done by Pagan Roman General, but when Roman Empire accepted Christianity in year 330 CE, they did not allow Jews to come back to Jerusalem.
This situation continued till Muslim armies took control of Jerusalem from Byzantine Empire in 650 CE.
From that day till 1967, there was only a "marginal presence" of Jews in Jerusalem and elsewhere in Palestine.
And they have cheek to say that "jews were in majority in Jerusalem for past 150 years".
They might "invent" a new History making industry, to write whatever comes to their minds as "historical facts".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_hist...

As usual you have no idea what you are talking about probably brainwashed by Saudi hate.

The link above gives plenty of evidence that Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem for around 150 years.

SO YOU HAVE CLEARLY BEEN SHOWN TO BE A LIAR AGAIN WELL DONE.

You clearly know nothing about the conflict, history at all and the best you post here is spam articles.

It was the Jews who built much of what is today Jerusalem starting around 1840. The Old City was Jerusalem until then.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 34,981 - 35,000 of36,079
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

507 Users are viewing the Top Stories Forum right now

Search the Top Stories Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 6 min No Shiite 216,706
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 29 min Double Fine 679,817
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 48 min Michael 511,923
Ray Nunez PMG Studios Designer for Jordin Spark... 55 min Ripped Off Too 2
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Epiphany2 596,488
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 1 hr petesake 109,515
gay snapchat 1 hr Horny 3
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr KiMare 89,507
Girls snapchat names?(dirty) 2 hr dragonrunner 232
•••
•••
•••