You are right it's wasn't Israel it was mostly properly owned by the rothchilds until he donated it to make the state of Israel once the queen of England agreed to recognize it as a country.... But that probably doesn't make any difference. Probably doesn't make a difference that the rothchilds where from the Khazar empire either.
a) NATION implies each one of a people. Suggested nationalism slaps a label upon a people to collectivize them.
b) consenting (want or not want) to suggested (nationalism) tempts one into a conflict of reason (want vs not want), while permitting those suggesting to rebrand the sides into for example Palestine vs israel.
c) focusing on a brand (nationalism), distracts one from what's burning within (each one of a people). Reasoning (Palestine vs isreal) over suggested; tempts one to ignore each one underneath the labels, hence distracting one from all the ethnic cleansing of other ones.
d) to distract from nationalism...others suggest internationalism to tempt one into an internal (nationalism) vs external (internationalism) conflict of reason. The external side is now called "globalism".
What one ignores..."internationalism" implies INTERNAL NATION, hence within and among a people. But if nationalism burns a people (nation) and those who suggest internationalism are not outside but inside, then how do they protect themselves?
Situated at the center (chosen ones) of every conflict (imbalance among reasoning choices), the local few can make a burned offering out of the many within their circumference, hence circumcising external imbalance to sustain internal balance.
Why does that work? Because being implies center (choice) of surrounding (balance), and consenting to the suggested choices of others puts oneself into imbalance. If a many ignore perceivable balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want); then only a chosen few remain balanced.
Yes it is a lie. Palestinians didn't control anything. I literally explained who ruled the area in the times where the map claims it was "Palestinian Land".
It never was Palestinian land. It was Ottoman land, British land, Egyptian or Jordan land.
Never did Palestinians rule it.
If you disagree, tell me which Palestinians exactly ruled the region in 1946.
Because history started in 1946.
You are right it's wasn't Israel it was mostly properly owned by the rothchilds until he donated it to make the state of Israel once the queen of England agreed to recognize it as a country.... But that probably doesn't make any difference. Probably doesn't make a difference that the rothchilds where from the Khazar empire either.
Was it a sovereign nation ruled by Palestinians before that? No. Ok then.
Palestinians didn't flood our countries with third world shitskins.
Fuck Isreal and Fuck Palestine and fuck wignats.
a) NATION implies each one of a people. Suggested nationalism slaps a label upon a people to collectivize them.
b) consenting (want or not want) to suggested (nationalism) tempts one into a conflict of reason (want vs not want), while permitting those suggesting to rebrand the sides into for example Palestine vs israel.
c) focusing on a brand (nationalism), distracts one from what's burning within (each one of a people). Reasoning (Palestine vs isreal) over suggested; tempts one to ignore each one underneath the labels, hence distracting one from all the ethnic cleansing of other ones.
d) to distract from nationalism...others suggest internationalism to tempt one into an internal (nationalism) vs external (internationalism) conflict of reason. The external side is now called "globalism".
What one ignores..."internationalism" implies INTERNAL NATION, hence within and among a people. But if nationalism burns a people (nation) and those who suggest internationalism are not outside but inside, then how do they protect themselves?
Situated at the center (chosen ones) of every conflict (imbalance among reasoning choices), the local few can make a burned offering out of the many within their circumference, hence circumcising external imbalance to sustain internal balance.
Why does that work? Because being implies center (choice) of surrounding (balance), and consenting to the suggested choices of others puts oneself into imbalance. If a many ignore perceivable balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want); then only a chosen few remain balanced.
1946: British Mandate, not ruled by Palestinians.
1947-1967: Gaxa annexed by Egypt, West Bank annexed by Jordan. Not ruled by Palestinians.
2008: for the first time in history, Palestinians control land politically.
Op's map has been on the internet for many years and for many years has been a filthy propaganda lie.
Yes it is a lie. Palestinians didn't control anything. I literally explained who ruled the area in the times where the map claims it was "Palestinian Land".
It never was Palestinian land. It was Ottoman land, British land, Egyptian or Jordan land.
Never did Palestinians rule it.
If you disagree, tell me which Palestinians exactly ruled the region in 1946.
Can you?