🎓 Dr. Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱 on Nostr: npub1jflcd…gfmdd h I see! In your earlier post you said “Once the invasion was ...

npub1jflcdvljl0n8hlz27798d0044rxwkqz69gapvcctt4p4gdt4kasqjgfmdd (npub1jfl…fmdd) h I see! In your earlier post you said “Once the invasion was announced (that is, the international community of jews, along with the UN,”, so pretty clearly 1947

Well im glad we clarified now that this is in refernce to 1917, the first announcement of invasion. Yes I could have been more clear, so not your fault. But now we are on the same page, so great. So I thought that’s what you meant by the numbers you gave.

Understandable miscommunication. Glad we resolved that. Aside: You know, I’m having a hard time following you. You obfuscate a lot – e.g. calling something “illegal immigration” when you really mean “The British shouldn’t have encouraged Jewish immigration or even been there at all”. I mean, I see your point, and I even agree with you (of course I agree with you) that the British shouldn’t have colonized 99% of the world generally and made this problem a lot worse – in more ways than just that! – specifically. But like it took an awful long time for me to nail down what it was you were talking about! I took you at your word and was thinking you’re saying the Ottomans weren’t enforcing their immigration laws or something.😂 It’s exhausting! in a conversation like this it sure would be easier to follow if we were speaking a bit more precisely.

Words are important, you tried to claim they were just immigrants at the get go… thats very confusing considering they were an invading force and not “just immigrants”.. they came there to kill the other side and take their land.

Luckily I am happy to explain if any words confuse you, while I will continue to use, perhaps unusual, but more factually accurate terms you can always just ask if they confuse you. There is a lot of context so I do understand the need to elaborate on any of it, so no worries. OK so you really are all in on this “refugee immigration” == “invasion” rhetoric. Like, deliberately. Well, that is disappointing.

I mean they literally showed up with weapons and killed and shot the other side to take the land… it is a Very accurate description. In fact to become an Israel citizen you are required to pick up a weapon and shoot the other side by israel law. Not just immigrants but those born there.. this has been established since the early days… Like it is literally an invasion, those people had weapons and killed others as part of the condition of their immigration.

Calling them simple refugee immigrants is highly unfair considering. so you understand how awful that would have been at that point, in 1947, right? I mean, even if you think the initial immigration was a terrible thing, a huge chunk of those people were born in Palestine, even. It’s like the Soviet relocations – I guess you’re thinking of Jewish immigration to Palestine as if it was like that – this was absolutely horrible that they did that, but what are you going to do about the situation in Crimea and other places like that 100 years later?

Well maybe thats why you shouldnt invade another country and take their land by force that you havent had any right to in over 2000+ years… You sure as fuck dont tell them that they now annexed the land for themselves and you kick off the far more densly populated natives as if you somehow have a right.

Like even if they decided to stay, the only ethical way to stay is as a palestinian under their laws and following their rules.. Dont like it, well maybe you shouldnt have picked taht country to invade knowing you or your kids might have to be held accountable for your immoral acts.