Termyn8or
Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
|
FR
OK I guess everybody is sufficiently pissed off now.
What was the point of this ? (now that you didn't ask)
In the beginning I asked, and each and every answer given to the original question was in relation to the Jews. We are not so stupid I think not to realize that Arabs and others are also Semites. But we take the term like people do America, or American. People seem to glance over the fact that US Citizens are not the only Americans. In that sense, consider the corrected definition.
Now I understand that America is a continent, and I am unaware of any continent named Semit, or whatever it would be, Semia or whatever ? But that doesn't change the comonalities and differences. So what is this, association of convenience ? Why did they pick the term anti-Semite ? Would you say Hugo Chavez Frias would be considered anti-American ? His country was in America last I checked, and I don't think they moved.
What fuels this whole bunch of shit in the middle east is beyond what we can easily comprehend. If you can't take it, go somewhere more interesting. The Semites have been fighting over pretty much the same part of the planet for longer than a paint stain on a silk shirt. There is something about that land, that part of the world. Each faction wants to dominate as much of it as possible. Our interest in their black gold is but one newer factor in the mix.
Semites, and I mean all of them, seem to have some type of love for that area. Why ? Is it a Biblical thing ? Or is it considered home for some other obscure reason ? Given how they treat their fellows, I don't think they are heeding the Bible all that much. As much smiting and all that depicted in the Bible, it doesn't necessarily condone this shit. Although it does seem to place a special importance on that part of the world. As if it were a continent actually.
Let's look at the Bible, and oil. Now no matter how high the people who wrote the Bible may have been, I don't think they had any malicious intent. In fact I would say their intent would be to promote the best interests of their people. Could they have known ?
Why is it so important ? Let's say for example someone came here and took over the country. What would you do ? You would fight of course and despite our differences I would be right there with you, like it or not. Let's suppose we lose.
We have to move. We would then be in diaspora, that is if we had any national solidarity in the first place. But say in decades we grow stronger, with or without a nation. What do we do ? Do we insist on this particular piece of land ? Tell me why.
This is the factor, the one I've tried to uncover. Objectively, put yourself in practically anyone else's shoes. You are displaced. Of course you can find somewhere. But you long for home. Is it worth it ? And after many years, who knows what happened to the place you once called home ?
Having known some European immigrants, they make an informed concious decision not to go back. And no, generally they are not wanted criminals or anything like that. Why did they leave ? Because they didn't like it there.
Is a nation or a home comprised of dirt, or lines on a map ? Or perhaps bricks and mortar. Or are we like salmon, that must lay eggs from where they were spawned ? I think not. And if we are supposedly supposed to think of ourselves as one race - the human race, what sense does it make to kill one anther simply to move lines on a map ?
You either define home one way or the other. It either has your people, your bed, your house, your everything or it has coordinates, latitude and longitude. And like the other issues of inclusion and exclusion, we seem to use whichever standard fits the moment.
Territorial witch hunting pack animals.
T^T
|
RE: Let's just settle this shit once and for all, I'm s... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread