Am I a anti-semitist?

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Natan
100 or even 50 years ago, almost every Ashkenazi Jew spoke Yiddish, except for German Jews who spoke German.

Which is kind of odd then since Yiddish has a very high percentage of German in it.

I think it fits the definition of a Creole type language. A mixed language.

Nation sort of fits though, because there is a common history and origin - for what it's worth, genetic studies show that Jews are still genetically related to each other (and, interestingly, to the Palestinians) despite thousands of years in exile.

Too a suprising degree in most instances. I think some groups are less Semetic than others. Look at Kirk Douglas for instance. That man seems to have more Norse than anything else.

If Jews are still highly related after all this time it shouldn't be too suprising that they are still closely related to other Semites like the Arabs.

Makes me curious about the Ethiopian Jews.

Jews from different countries have historically communicated in Hebrew. Also, Jews have always described themselves as a people or a nation.

Which is still not a justification for a state in a country that was primarily Arab.

Also, as for the Balfour doctrine, it's legal basis was the British Palestine mandate given to Britain by the League of Nations.

Not in 1917. The League of Nations did not yet exist. Even when it did accept the Balfour Doctrine in 1922 they did nothing to fix the inherent amibiguity in it. In any case the people allready living there were not asked what they thought about it and there were a number of League mandated requirments that were never undertaken thus undermining any legality that there was.

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Ethelred
Big if since I have been consistant.

The only thing your consistant about is how wrong you are.

I take that as an admision that you did indeed make up my position.

Your postion is Israel has no right to exsist.
Do you deny it?

Who is they? Yiddish is spoken by primarily by German Jews and Jews that came from Germany. Not very many American Jews actualy speak Yiddish. I know almost as much Yiddish as most Jews in California. A few dozen slang terms is what most know out here.

This goes to "ask mw if I care what you know" dept.
YOU don't know it so it isn't so?

Lots don't. A lot of American Jews are upset over this. You really should have noticed this considering you live in New York.

Would like to provide a shred of proof?
Good luck.

Well my boss did but the owner of the store did not. He was a fifth generation atheist and still ethnicly Jewish.

And this is relivent in what way?

I am not splittling hairs. My point was that a nationality is not a state. The rest was pointing out how the definition of nation that you gave did not fully fit Jews. Ethnic group does.

Both does.
Nice misdiresction attempt by you, but no dice.

Israel is a post WWII state. You have a problem with consistancy.

As we talk, I'm begining to believe your IQ is severly limited.
The Jews accepted the self determination they were offered, the arabs didn't.
They were attacked.
If you don't know this, what the hell are you trying to discuss this for?

I don't have to. You have to show a legal basis for the State of Israel as you are the one claiming its legal.

UN Resolution, 29 November 1947.
I already said that SEVERAL times, please try to pay attention.

It is however against the UN principle of self-determination as I pointed out before.

Are REALLY this stupid or are you just trolling?
The people there practiced self determination, they declared their state of Israel, the Arabs invaded the next day.
That right was desputed by the Islamic side, they fought a war over it, Israel won.

The UN is one. The Hague is another. The International Law of the Sea doesn't seem to apply but it is the only real international law.

Now your learning.
Law is what can be enforced, not what a body of nations claim it is.

Well then there is no way to legaly justify Israel is there?

By your standards, there is no way to justify ANY nation.

Where did I give one there? Perhaps you left out a few words. I do that myself and way too often.
The only thing I have used for a definition of a legal way to found a state in the present world is the principle of self-determination. Which was denied to most of the inhabitants of the land now called Israel when it was founded.

Once again, why do you have this impression?
They were given there own nation, they REFUSED.
Man, you are thick.

Taking land by fiat is opression and that is what happened when Israel was founded. No one asked the locals.

The locals FOUNDED Israel.
You really don't know about any of this, do you?

What does the PLO have to do with a single thing I have said? Nothing is what. I have ONLY been talking about the creation of the state of Israel not what has occured since then.

What DOESN'T it?
All you have said is what they say, almost word for word.
They were all happy till those jew bastards showed up and stole their land.
This is all you have said, in different words, to be sure, but the same exact meaning.

Not being allowed to have a say in what nation they would belong to strike me as oppressive. If we weren't talking about Israel I suspect you too would find it unjust.

All they had to do was live in peace.
They chose war.
Once again, go do some serious reading about the partion and Israel's fight to survive, it's becoming more and more obvious your talking through your hat.

Its a situation created in 1948 and before. I am not talking about today and I have been very consistent about this. You are talking about the PLO and post 1948.

ONE MORE TIME:
In 1947, Britain annouced it's intention to give up protecterate status of Palestine.
It asked the UN for a recomendation, the plan put force was to let those who wer Palestians to have all such lands, and all who were Jews to have there lands, to form their own countries.
The Arab side rejected this out of hand, saying that if the Jews got a country, they would drive them into the sea, and kill them all.
That is the EXACT wording of the threat.
They attempted this when Israel did indeed annouce itself as a state.
They lost.

Too bad for them on this. However I understand your point.

You get used to it on Apolyton.

Why shouldn't they have gone to war over it? The partition plan was unjust. There is simply no excuse for giving mostly Arab land to a bunch of Europeans.

And where were these "arab" lands?
This is the same bull you tried before.
THE LAND WAS NEVER ARAB. THE PARTITION WAS BASED ON ETHNIC LINES.
Who the hell are you to say they have no right to the land they lived on?
Who are these "Europeans"?
There were no "Europeans", only Jews.
If you knew as much about Jews as you claim, you would know they think of themselves as Jews.

From their point of view the founding of Israel was an act of war. They had not agreed to it and the only way to stop was to fight. Hardly an unreasonable action.

Are you out of your mind?
What right does an arab have to tell a Jew that he can't form a country in his own homeland, because the Arab doesn't like it?
Too f*cking bad.

Again I point out that I am not talking about 50 years later. I am only talking the founding of Israel.

The Arabs were even more wrong 50 years ago then now.

The convolution was yours not mine. I have been standing on the principle of self-determination. Not much convolution in that.

An out and out lie on your part.
You continue to swear the Jews have no such right.

You really have a hard time understanding what people say when you don't like the consequences. I have been exceedingly consistent that I am talking about the founding of Israel not the present situation.

I have a hard time with dense MFers, and that's what you are friend.

The only thing holy there are the bodies. Once again you invent a position for me. Please stop doing it. You claim to be a historian. Do you make up the words for historical people also? I will ignore the rest of that section since it is just more of same. You making my thoughts for me.

Your exposed.
Bullsh1t artist is what you are.

I am fully capable of expressing myself. I don't need your help.

You need help friend, in many ways.

No. You are mistaking the Moslem conquest for an invasion by Arabs. The Arabs were there allready they just weren't Moslem yet.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

None of whom drove out the Arabs. Its darned hard to drive out nomads.

Your just making it up as you go along, aern't you?

Well how about you show my error on what I said about the Bible then? Can't do it can you?

You said it friend, not I.
I can't show you what isn't there.
Just another example of how full of sh1t you are.

I haven't dodged and I haven't twisted but YOU have tried to make up my position.

Your not worth my time, moron.

Kro, you wanted to know if your an anti-semite?
This ....person is one, all you need do is read what he says.

Jews are theaves (They STOLE the land)
Jews are alien invaders (THEY are europeans)
Jews are unlawful oppressors (THEY have no right to be there, THEY took away self determination)

Yet according to this idiot, they have no such rights.

Show him facts, he answers in riddles.
Show his history, he denies it.
Ask him to prove his lies, he says "make me!".

Ethelred is a true anti-semite.

[Natan]

Originally posted by Ethelred
Which is kind of odd then since Yiddish has a very high percentage of German in it.

I think it fits the definition of a Creole type language. A mixed language.

It's a class thing; speaking German (or even Russian) was considered more sophisticated than Yiddish, so people made the switch.

Which is still not a justification for a state in a country that was primarily Arab.

Did I say it was?

Not in 1917. The League of Nations did not yet exist. Even when it did accept the Balfour Doctrine in 1922 they did nothing to fix the inherent amibiguity in it. In any case the people allready living there were not asked what they thought about it and there were a number of League mandated requirments that were never undertaken thus undermining any legality that there was.

Is the issue here the legality, or that the Palestinians weren't asked?

[Chris 62]

Forget it Natan, read what he says.

The Jews are theives who have no rights.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Ned
Ethelred, the people Romans settled into the newly created province of Palestine after the defeat of the Jews in 135 were mainly from Syria. After the universal suffrage was granted to all residents of Roman Empire in the early 200's, all residents of Palestine were Roman citizens.

From Syria would still be Semites.

Below is a description of the critical events in the early six hundreds that led to the capture of Jerusalem, Syria and the Persian Empire by the Arabs.

Semites were allready there.

That link describes the conquest from a slightly prejiduced point of view. Just a touch don't you think?

In any case I don't the see the locals getting wiped out. The locals were christian Semites except for the Jewish community in Jerusalem.

Here is a link that describes the Persian conquest of Jerusalem. History records that 20,000 Christians lost their lives. Apparently, the Persians chose not to kill the Jews, but left them in the city. Thus when the Arabs captured Jerusalem and 634, it probably was a city that was inhabited by Jews, who were Roman citizens.

Which is still only the one city. 20,000 isn't much for Jerusalem so I suspect there were a lot of christians still by the time the Moslems came.

Thereafter, the people converted to to Islam. They learned to speak Arabic in order to read the Koran, as the Arabs refused to let it be translated into any other language.

So what language did the Syrians speak?

Back to the U.S. Army handbook, there is a quite interesting description of how the British during WWI made a number of inconsistent deals to gain the support of the Saudi family, the Jews both in Palestine, United States and Russia, and the French, giving each of them "pieces" of the Middle East, sometimes, the same piece. The Saudi King believed he had a deal with the British that would give his family to right to rule Palestine, although document was not clear in this point. However what is clear is at the Saudis have been among the leaders in hostility to a Jewish state in Palestine. They seem to have given up however on the concept of having a member of their family rule Palestine.

Well that sure doesn't increase the legality of the British actions.

I think we both agree that the Arabs never cooperated with the British mandate,

Well you got something right. After all the British had no mandate from the locals.

never agreed to the Belfour declaration, refused an offer from the U.N. in 1947 to have a separate Palestinian state,

Why should they agree? It wasn't UN land. It wasn't Brittish land except by conquest and that conquest was done with Arab allies.

committed repeated acts of violence on the Jewish people in Palestine prior to 1948,

Well people do tend to get annoyed when the land they live on is about to be taken from them. I don't see anything there justifying the creation of Israel. More like a reason to stop the highhanded actions by foreigners.

made war on them when they created state of Israel in 1948, again in 1967, again in 1973 and finally in the current Intifada that began several years ago and has progressively increased in violence.

]

Which has nothing to do with the lack of justification for the state of Israel.

Somehow, throughout all these events, it has been the Jews who have provoked the attacks by not agreeing to leave Palestine or to live in a state dominated by Arabs who clearly would not permit free Jewish immigration into the Holy Land even as they were being butchered by the millions by the Europeans.

Well if the Europeans didn't want to give the Jews a nation in their territory why should the Arabs agree to this sort of action in their land.

Several false statements as well. Do you get away with this crap a lot?

The Arabs ALLOWED the Jews to come to Israel while they were being killed by Europeans. The criminals were European. The victims were European. What did the Arabs have to do with this except that allowed refugees to come into their land. For their hospitality they were rewarded by haveing their land taken.

As a suicide bombings and machine-gunning of little girls increased to several a day, you would deny them the right to defend themselves and put a stop to barbarous Arafat.

You still haven't learned I won't allow you to put words in my mouth. Well you didn't promise not to so I guess its not suprising that you would do yet another time.

I never said that. STOP IT. Its really getting tiresome to have you make up things about my position.

Do I understand your position correctly?

Ned

Do you understand ANYTHING correctly? Quit inventing. Next I won't be polite about it. There is nothing polite in you constantly inventing words to put in my mouth so I no reason to remain polite to you if you don't stop it.

[Ethelred]

If some were able to see (as Jabotinsky saw) that Hitler was going to murder them, I think that's a good justification for their immigration.

The point was that no one was being killed at that time. You are using a future event to justify the action. I did not disagree with the rest of that part. There is a LOT of falacious reasoning going on here and was pointing one falacy in your arguement. You didn't need it to support immigration. You arguement was stronger logicaly without it.

I think you're confusing this with the quota system which ended in 1917, but at any rate, do we agree that there were severe restrictions which prevented most German Jews from going to America?

On anyone not English or maybe Irish.

Lebanon did not succeed for centuries because it did not exist as an independent state until after World War I.

Well not as a state but it did function as an area.

Nor has Lebanon succeeded in "mixing" Christians and Muslims. The whole Lebanese system is and always has been based on a careful balancing of the different ethnic groups' interests and influences, AFAIK intermarriage is close to non-existant.

I didn't claim they mixed. Just that they managed to live with each other.

You were arguing that the Arabs only expelled Jews because Jews were trying to create a Jewish state, and I responded that Jews were only expelling Arabs because they were trying to create an Arab state, in both cases by seizing territory.

Well since most of the Jews were imigrants perhaps they should have acted more like guests and less like invaders. Thats what setting up a Jewish state was very much like. So far all you have done is shown that the Middle East was not a good choice to migrate to.

Menachem Begin had declared the war several times. Do you acknowledge a difference between guerilla warfare and terrorism?

What makes that different from the Palestinians then? They have never made peace. They are have been at war with Israel since 1948. They just didn't start fighting till later.

The Intifada would be a normal war if not for the intentional targetting of civillians. I'm not arguing that Palestinians can't kill Israeli soldiers.

All Israeli adults up to a certain age are soldiers. It comes with having a universal reserve system. Intentional targeting of children is wrong. I have never tried to justify the actions of the PLO.

What is the point of putting a bomb in a disco if you don't intend to kill people with it? And if they don't kill anyone, isn't it just dangerous vandalism?

I am not the one trying to justify terrorism. You are trying to justify the acts of Begin.

I think any definition of terrorism which includes attacks on military sites with special precautions taken to avoid civillian casualties is absurd. The United States didn't declare war on Sudan before bombing it, but I don't think our action there could be considered terrorism.

First person killed was a civilian. I don't call that taking special care.

[Ned]

Ethelred, I believe the Syrians are descended from the Assyrians who were and are an Indo-
European people. As to the language they spoke it probably depends upon the era. Certainly, at the time of Christ, many people in the region spoke Aramaic, but I don't know about Assyrians. Many people the region also spoke Greek, but many governmental functions were carried on in Latin. However I believe that the time of the Arab conquests, the common language of the region was Greek.

Ned

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Chris 62
The only thing your consistant about is how wrong you are.

So why can't show how I am wrong or inconsistent without making things up. It should be easy yet you felt the need to invent things.

Your postion is Israel has no right to exsist.
Do you deny it?

I never said any such thing. You invented it. Why do you even bother to copy anthing from my posts?

This goes to "ask mw if I care what you know" dept.
YOU don't know it so it isn't so?

Funny how Natan largely agreed with that. Most American Jews don't speak Yiddish. There are far more Jews in the US than in Israel.

Would like to provide a shred of proof?
Good luck.

I will let you repair your ignorance on your own. It was an aside and hasn't enough relevance to this discusion for me to go lurking on a bunch of Jewish-American sites.

And this is relivent in what way?

And what have you said that was relevant? So far you have only managed to make things up. Not a good sign since you covered yourself pretty well in some other discusions. Well it did take while for you to do that even then.

Both does.
Nice misdiresction attempt by you, but no dice.

Both do but ethnic fits better than nation. Nationality fits better than nation. I didn't try to misdirect. With all you experience at that you should have noticed.

As we talk, I'm begining to believe your IQ is severly limited.
The Jews accepted the self determination they were offered, the arabs didn't.
They were attacked.
If you don't know this, what the hell are you trying to discuss this for?

I am beginning to think you are a different Chris from the one I saw supporting himself when that Chris was saying the Arabs were the worst civ. Just remember that YOU started the personal attacks. I am sure you won't remember though. You seem short on memory.

The Arabs weren't offered self-determination. The Jews weren't either. They formed a state on their own.

If you can't support a thing you say what are YOU doing here. This is really sad coming from an alledged historian. Not one bit of support and you invent things to put in my mouth.

UN Resolution, 29 November 1947.
I already said that SEVERAL times, please try to pay attention.

Actually its the FIRST time you mentioned it on this thread. You did say this though:

Trying to argue the ME from a leagal standpoint is next to impossible

Unless a vote was held there is no legal justification not even from the UN as it would violate its principle of self determination. No vote was held untill after Israel was founded and I have only been talking about the justification for the founding of Israel not what happened after.

Are REALLY this stupid or are you just trolling?

How green and scaly is your skin? I bet your real name is Grendal.

The people there practiced self determination, they declared their state of Israel, the Arabs invaded the next day.
That right was desputed by the Islamic side, they fought a war over it, Israel won.

There was no vote that allowed the Arabs to have a vote. In fact there was no Jewish vote till after they created a state which understandably annoyed the Arabs.

Now your learning.
Law is what can be enforced, not what a body of nations claim it is.

Considering it was I and not you that wrote it it looks more like YOU might actually be learning. You just undercut the UN and the League of Nations as justifications for a Jewish state. I guess you don't learn fast enough.

By your standards, there is no way to justify ANY nation.

Self determination. Something the creation of Israel denied to the Arabs.

Once again, why do you have this impression?
They were given there own nation, they REFUSED.
Man, you are thick.

They weren't "given" their own nation. Foreigners demanded they give up territory to get recognition. Why should they accede to that sort of nonsense?

The locals FOUNDED Israel.
You really don't know about any of this, do you?

The local Jews founded Israel. The local Arabs were not consulted. Yes I do know this which could by why foam is all over your keyboard.

What DOESN'T it?
All you have said is what they say, almost word for word.
They were all happy till those jew bastards showed up and stole their land.
This is all you have said, in different words, to be sure, but the same exact meaning.

Well if you want to call the Jews "bastards" you go right ahead. Be sure to wear your swastika.

If the PLO managed to say some of the things I have then I guess they managed to say few things right anyway. Not much but a little.

All they had to do was live in peace.

All they had to do was allow some foreigners to take over a large portion of their land and they would be allowed some of the worst land in the Middle East outside of the Empty Quarter. How kind of you.

They chose war.

No they chose to fight for what they thought of as theirs. The Jews chose war since they knew full well what creating a state would do.

Once again, go do some serious reading about the partion and Israel's fight to survive, it's becoming more and more obvious your talking through your hat.

Its becoming more an more obvious that you foam at the keyboard.

ONE MORE TIME:
In 1947, Britain annouced it's intention to give up protecterate status of Palestine.
It asked the UN for a recomendation, the plan put force was to let those who wer Palestians to have all such lands, and all who were Jews to have there lands, to form their own countries.
The Arab side rejected this out of hand, saying that if the Jews got a country, they would drive them into the sea, and kill them all.
That is the EXACT wording of the threat.
They attempted this when Israel did indeed annouce itself as a state.
They lost.

Well they lost anyway. Please note that even in your version it says IF they got a country. So the Jews knew that creating a nation in someone elses land was going to start a war. Big suprise that must have been.

And where were these "arab" lands?
This is the same bull you tried before.

Right smack where Israel is now.

THE LAND WAS NEVER ARAB. THE PARTITION WAS BASED ON ETHNIC LINES.

Ethnic lines that hadn't existed just a few years before.

Who the hell are you to say they have no right to the land they lived on?
Who are these "Europeans"?
There were no "Europeans", only Jews.
If you knew as much about Jews as you claim, you would know they think of themselves as Jews.

If you were really American you would have noticed that American Jews are Americans.

They were Europeans for the most part. That they were Jewish would have been incedental to the Arabs.

Are you out of your mind?

Do you have one?

What right does an arab have to tell a Jew that he can't form a country in his own homeland, because the Arab doesn't like it?
Too f*cking bad.

It wasn't their homeland. They had been gone for 1800 years and it was then the Arab homeland.

The Arabs were even more wrong 50 years ago then now.

Funny about that. They were right then. I personaly didn't say much about now.

An out and out lie on your part.
You continue to swear the Jews have no such right.

That is a lie. Not suprising considering the source. Maybe you fingers just slipped on your froth covered keyboard.

Quit mixing up now and then. Thats a good buffoon.

Call me a liar and you earn what you get back.

I have a hard time with dense MFers, and that's what you are friend.

So what do you do when you are by yourself. Wear earplugs? I am sure you have never heard yourself speak anyway.

Your exposed.
Bullsh1t artist is what you are.

I may someday be proven wrong but I can't be exposed for something I am not. Certainly not by this sort of ranting psychotic post you have pounded out.

You need help friend, in many ways.

Not with you. You are too easy.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Gee that was a devastating rebuttal. I am quaking in fear that you might actually support yourself some day.

Your just making it up as you go along, aern't you?

Well I am just following your lead on that way.

You said it friend, not I.
I can't show you what isn't there.
Just another example of how full of sh1t you are.

Even for you that was pitifull. You most likely aren't even aware that you just aggreed with me.

Your not worth my time, moron.

I thank for that complement. Idiots can't tell a genius from a moron.

Kro, you wanted to know if your an anti-semite?
This ....person is one, all you need do is read what he says.

Well then I guess you are an anti-semite because you said it.

Jews are theaves (They STOLE the land)
Jews are alien invaders (THEY are europeans)
Jews are unlawful oppressors (THEY have no right to be there, THEY took away self determination)

Please tell me that you don't actually teach.

The Jews bought a lot of land but that doesn't give the right to create a government.

Well they were invited. However they broke with hospitality.

Well they formed a government without a legal justification.

They didn't let the Arabs vote on it either.

Hey this time you only massively distorted what I said instead of making all up. Thats improvement of a sort anyway. Still pretty much wrong though.

Yet according to this idiot, they have no such rights.

Well other than might makes right no they didn't have the right.

Show him facts, he answers in riddles.

How would you know? You didn't post any facts.

Show his history, he denies it.
Ask him to prove his lies, he says "make me!".

You never showed any history. You only frothed at the keyboard. I gave support. You didn't and you owe me an apology for your insults and bad manners.

Ethelred is a true anti-semite.

You are a clear and present Maroon. A liar too.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Natan
Is the issue here the legality, or that the Palestinians weren't asked?

Uhg Both?

Yeah I am pretty sure its both. Asking would have been a start to legality.

[Chris 62]

No son, you are a jew hater and an anti-semite.

I'm sorry I wasted my talking to such an ignoremous as you.

I won't bother in the future.

Your an idiot and a bigot, and I have no further use for you.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Chris 62
No son, you are a jew hater and an anti-semite.

You may be Darth Vader but you aren't my father and thinking that Israel should not have been created is not even close to being anit-semetic.

I'm sorry I wasted my talking to such an ignoremous as you.

I won't bother in the future.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. I am so pleased I won't be annoyed by a mindless drooling fool that thinks he said things he never said and makes up things to accuse me of.

Your an idiot and a bigot, and I have no further use for you.

You only wish your were an idiot you mannerless maroon. No one that knows me thinks I am a bigot.

Although a lot people have thought I was Jewish. Especially protestants that didn't like me and Jews that do.

You have been the most inept poster on this thread or in other thread I have seen on Apolyton. I won't bother to mention the next worst because none have reached the abyssal depths of your incompetence. Your idea of support is to misquote yourself. You idea of a quote of others is to make up their position.

And now for the final and most devasting insult I can think to anyone who's first language is English.

Your spelling is even worse than mine.

[Al'Kimiya]

Originally posted by Ned
I believe the Syrians are descended from the Assyrians who were and are an Indo-
European people.

Actually the Assyrians were semites, who spoke a dialect of akkadian (babylonian being another such). These people being east-semites and hebrews/arabs being west-semites. Some scholars argue though that the origin of all semites being the Akkadians (middle Iraq, about 2300 BC).

(edit, east/west was mixed up :-)

[Zevico]

Oh for crying out loud. You people are argueing over spilt milk! Israel is here. Whether you didn't want it here, I don't mind. It's not anti semitic. Whether you don't want it here now, is anti semitic. As someone else explained perfectly, grouping Sharon with Menachem Begin, for example, because of they're jewish, is anti semitic.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Al'Kimiya


Actually the Assyrians were semites, who spoke a dialect of akkadian (babylonian being another such). These people being east-semites and hebrews/arabs being west-semites. Some scholars argue though that the origin of all semites being the Akkadians (middle Iraq, about 2300 BC).

(edit, east/west was mixed up :-)

Al'Kimiya, Thanks for fixing that for me. But on language, do you agree that by 600 most Syrians spoke Greek?

As for Indo-Eurorpeans in the area, I found this very good "summary" link. Summary.

Ned

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Ethelred
You may be Darth Vader but you aren't my father and thinking that Israel should not have been created is not even close to being anit-semetic.

Your either a moron or an anti-semite, there is no third possibility.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. I am so pleased I won't be annoyed by a mindless drooling fool that thinks he said things he never said and makes up things to accuse me of.

Your not going to read your own posts anymore?

You only wish your were an idiot you mannerless maroon. No one that knows me thinks I am a bigot.

Why would I want to be like you?
Anyone that reads what you say sees it.
Spew your hate elsewhere fool, your exposed here.

Although a lot people have thought I was Jewish. Especially protestants that didn't like me and Jews that do.

Are these imaginary people, like your imaginary facts?

You have been the most inept poster on this thread or in other thread I have seen on Apolyton.

Nobody could ever take that title from you.

I won't bother to mention the next worst because none have reached the abyssal depths of your incompetence.

A group of monkees could post better then you.
More factually and logically as well, I might add.

Your idea of support is to misquote yourself. You idea of a quote of others is to make up their position.

God, it's amazing how stupid you are.
Were you born like this, or did someone bash your head at some point?

And now for the final and most devasting insult I can think to anyone who's first language is English.

Your spelling is even worse than mine.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha,
Showing, as usual, that you don't belong here.
Lefty is the worst speller by far.

People like you are an abomination.
The other folks here are to polite to tell you, but I don't waste time with fools like you.

Go crawl back under your rock, loser.