The is the UGEP (General Union of Palestinian Students) in Chile.
The Palestinians are elites in Chile, and they are swinging the policies of an up and coming Chile. Chile is now first world, and the rising star of Latin America.
FREE PALESTINE Building a bridge of dialogue in place of a Separational Wall.
The General Union of Palestinians Students (UGEP in Spanish) is not a small force to be ignored.
Yasser Arafat came out the Mideastern Branch of the Palestinian Student Union.
As you can see by that map on the poster, above, The UGEP does not recognize Israel at all. As far as the UGEP is concerned, all of Israel is Palestine.
The video above portrays idealistic Chilean Youth. No doubt, many are. What the video does not show is that the UGEP advocates the destruction of Israel. The poster’s words advocate dialogue. The poster’s map advocate destruction.
The UGEP, even in Chile where almost all Palestinians are Christian, advocates a very hard party line.
It may not look as severe because the women are Christians, and not burqa clad women with their roiling tongue curdling screams; but in the end, they advocate no less that their Muslim cousins.
Note: My own view is nuanced: Historically, the Jew have the best claim to Israel for many reasons. I do not see Jews as invaders to their own patrimony in the Mideast. The Jews do have a claim to the land.
But, sadly, neither can I deny that the Israelis ethnically cleansed the Palestinians in 1948 and 1967, nor that Palestinians were and are mistreated. No nation is perfect. We Americans were not perfect. Chile – the nation these youth live in how – was guilty of ethnically cleansing its Mapuche and Quechua Indians. No nation is perfect.
Innocent people were hurt in 1948; and yes, that includes innocent Arabs.
Unlike these youth, I do NOT think the destruction of Israel as a homeland for the Jews is the answer. That would be insane. Destroying or re-defining the Jewishness out of Israel is not the answer to the problem.
Israel has a right to be the homeland for the Jewish people.
There is too much hurt, too much history, and too much blood, for the Jews to surrender their state.
Sadly, there is too much hurt, too much history, and too much blood, for the Palestinians to forget.
Islam is too radicalized for the Israeli Jews to trust their fate to a one-state solution, which allows for the Palestinians to return; and which restores an angry Islamic majority to the land. Israeli Jews will never do it. Nor should they be asked to dissolve their state.
THE BEST SOLUTION!
I think the best solution is to pay the Palestinians to leave for the West, preferably South America, which has history of assimilating the Arabs well.
Pay them well… about $100,000 per Palestinian.
This may not be a totally just solution, but it is the least destructive. I know it is awful to ask the Palestinians to surrender their claims to the land; but the only alternative is nuclear war – a nuclear war where they would be targeted.
I know some will say: It is not right to write the Palestinians out of history. You are right!
Indeed it is wrong to write the Palestinians out of history.
It would be FAR MORE WRONG to write Israel out of history.
Ultimately – as cruel as it may sound – this cold logic applies: If there are 22 Arab states, it would be wrong to dismantle the only Jewish state to correct the injustice and to restore another Arab state.
It is wrong to deny the Palestinians a right to return, but it is MORE WRONG to dismantle Israel as the homeland for the Jews.
There is no completely just solution here … only a less destructive one.
Denying Israel is NOT the answer.
The Jewish right to Israel and Jerusalem is solid.
I am not saying Palestinians were not hurt; but the destruction of Israel is NOT the answer.
Finally, there is a spiritual side to this.
On the spiritual side, Israel is totally right. There may be some political wrongs, but in the end, Israel has the better claim.
November 15, 2023: Edited: Made more mobile friendly. June 12, 2024: Edited: Removed a dead video. Changed text.
Tuesday, 14 May 2013 19:15
Written by Jordan Greene
Chilean ambassador accuses foreign media of mischaracterizing government role in plans to export freshwater run-off from Patagonian ice field to Middle East.
A Middle Eastern newspaper caused a storm of controversy in Chile this week after publishing an article stating that Qatar would import water extracted from melting glaciers in Patagonia.
…
This story is beyond odd, with breaking reports and denials, then more breaking reports.
The odd thing is that Northern Chile’s Atacama desert is the driest place on earth with water shortages.
Why would a company export water to literally the opposite end of the planet when his own country needs it.
…the fifth factor was the call by the Arab governments to the inhabitants of Palestine to evacuate it (Palestine) and leave for the bordering Arab countries. Since 1948, it is we who have demanded the return of the refugees, while it is we who made them leave. We brought disaster upon a million Arab refugees by inviting them and bringing pressure on them to leave. We have accustomed them to begging…we have participated in lowering their morale and social level…Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson and throwing stones upon men, women and children…all this in the service of political purposes…
— Khaled el-Azm, Syrian prime minister after the 1948 War, in his 1972 memoirs, published in 1973..
The Muslim world is using the Palestinian Arabs as a ploy. So far it is working. In 1948, much of the world supported Israel. Now much of the world blames Israel.
To expect the Arabs to take in the Palestinians is a False Hope
They have set up protocols which demand that no Arab state naturalize any Palestinian at all. The official reason is to maintain their claim on Palestine. They are condemned to be a stateless people.
In 1950, the UN set up the United Nations Relief and Works Agency as a “temporary” relief effort for Palestinian refugees. Former UNRWA director Ralph Galloway stated eight years later that, “the Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders do not give a damn whether Arab refugees live or die.” The only thing that has changed since then is the number of Palestinians cooped up in these prison camps.
In Fact, We can expect the Muslim World to resist any Solution
The Muslim states will thwart any effort that does not include the return of so many Palestinian Arabs as to destroy Israel.
It is more than just the Muslim states. Many Palestinians Arab refugees insist on the right of return, and will not give it up – though far less are this strident than will admit it publicly.
I say Muslim states, because I doubt if any non-Arab Muslim states will help either.
The Palestinian problem, if it is to be solved, must look outside the Arab world to find a solution.
001 – The Awful Spanish Language – Guess the Pronouns
Hampering this site, is my 40 year struggle with the Spanish language. A losing battle that I have been waging since high school There have been many casualties in this war. My grade point average suffered many losses.
Frankly, I have suffered LPTSD (Linguistic Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome) ever since.
The Spanish alphabet is easy. Differences with the English alphabet are minor. Both are Roman based alphabets.
Spanish spelling is easy. It is phonetic. Completely so. Almost no exceptions. Much easier than English, but such ease is only part of the deception.
SPANISH GRAMMAR IS A WAR CRIME,
Every single aspect of Spanish grammar is designed to defeat logic, infuriate the reader – or listener, and destroy neurons in the brain.
SPANISH GRAMMAR IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION
Were one to organize his though patterns in English the way the Spanish do in their own language, one would be diagnosed as bi-polar schizophrenic.
Think of it. About 600 Million people (in Latin America, Spain, Puerto Rico, and much of the United States) are daily walking around with psychotic thought patterns in their brains thanks to THE AWFUL SPANISH LANGUAGE!
Let us start off this series with a very simple example to illustrate my point.
It is a game the Spanish play every day called:
GUESS THE PRONOUN
Take this simple sentence that you want to translate:
I gave it to her.
Simple. Easy! Straightforward. There is no reason this should be difficult.
Ah ha! When you encounter the gremlins of Spanish grammar, this becomes a nightmare.
The correct translation is:
Se lo di a ella.
And if you look in a Spanish grammar, it will tell you this is how you translate: I gave it to her.
THEY ARE LYING!
What Se lo di a ellaactually says is this:
(to an undetermined recipient) it gave to (her or she). Yes, this is what it says:
(to an undetermined recipient) it give to (her or she).
THAT IS HOW YOU SAY IT IN SPANISH!
(to an undetermined recipient) it gave to (her or she).
(to an undetermined recipient) (Se) it gave to (her or she).
Se – can mean him, her, it, one, them, you, you (plural). Frankly, you have to guess who the undetermined recipient is.
Yet, that is exactly what the Spanish language requires.
Spanish leaves these thought mines buried in each sentence ready to explode as soon as you light upon it. You have to figure out who or what the pronoun is referring to. Now you, the average American reader, will struggle enough trying to keep up with a conversation as it moves along. You don’t need to figure what the pronoun means.
Many a time I was following a simple Spanish conversation – Say Don Francisco talking to the TV audience on Sabado Gigante (Giant Saturday), when all of a sudden a pronoun is uttered, my brain seizes, and all comprehension is lost.
Don Francisco on Sabado Gigante
The most watched TV show in history
I turn off the TV show and despair of every learning Spanish. That is the way it was in 1988 when I was watching Spanish TV and trying to learn Spanish for the third time in my life. That is the way it is, today.
(to an undetermined recipient) it (lo) gave to (her or she).
lo – In this case lo mean “it.” In other cases lo can mean “him,” or “the most,” Again, you have to figure it out.
And why shouldn’t you? say the Latins.
We Americans stole California and Texas from them, they think. We stole Puerto Rico from the Spanish, they claim. We have an embargo on Cuba. The British sunk their Armada.
Hey, I may be American, but my ancestors weren’t British. Don’t blame me for the Armada.
The Latins torture us with their grammar. It is revenge. Pure and simple.
(to an undetermined recipient) it (lo) gave to (her or she).
You will notice that lo meaning “it,” is placed before the verb not after the verb making it look like “it gave,” rather than “gave it.”
You will find in a later lesson, that the Latins play, FIND THE PRONOUN as well as GUESS THE PRONOUN.
There is no hard and fast rule about whether to put the object pronoun before or after the verb.
Frankly, the Latins put it wherever they feel like putting it, and usually where it is the most incomprehensible.
(to an undetermined recipient) it gave (di) to (her or she).
di – di is the first person singular of past tense of the Spanish verb (dar) “to give.”
Okay, but where is the subject pronoun in the sentence to tell you who was the giver?
Was it “I gave,” or “he gave,” or “you gave?” We know something was given. Who gave it?
Now, Spanish takes the pronoun torture to a new level.
They refuse to tell you. There is a Spanish pronoun for “I.”
“yo” means “I” in the Spanish language.
Most of the time they refuse to use it!
Why? Just to drive us, los yanquis (the Yankees), nuts.
The Spanish not only ask you to guess the meaning of the pronoun, they don’t even bother to tell you the pronoun whose meaning you are supposed to guess.
It is like a game of “Can you tell me what is in the box?” Only the Spanish don’t even let you look at the box.
Sometimes the verb tells you. In this case: di implies “I gave.” The verb conjugation clues you in.
But this is just to trick you. You relent and press forward, thinking the verb conjugation will help you; which is what they want to think.
Then they can hit you with more sucker punches.
hablabacan mean “I used to speak,” or “he used to speak,” or “she used to speak.”
In this case, the verb conjugation only compounds the confusion.
And there is no requirement for the Latin to assist you; other than he might have mercy on you, as your brain starts to fulminate with smoke fluming out through your ears, as you discombobulate from grammar overload.
The Latins are notorious for their cruelty, and don’t expect to be helped.
Why?
Why?! Because they hate us.
I would tell them, you can have Puerto Rico back, just change your **** grammar, will you?
They laugh. They have us right where the want us. Foaming at the mouth from incomprehension, and grammar induced psychosis.
a – a in this case means “to.” You might think this is the first straightforward and easy translation in this simple – or at least you thought it was going to be simple – sentence.
Not so fast. a can also mean a variety of things like “at,” or “on.” When a lands in the middle of an idiom, innocent civilians have been killed.
Finally we come to:
ella – ellacan mean “she” or “her.” You have to guess.
There are rules for this in Spanish, supposedly. I have seen lists of pronoun charts in Spanish. And they would be helpful, in theory.
But most of the time, the Spanish never even use pronouns. So what does it matter?
But a final question arises.
(to an undetermined recipient) it gave to (her or she) (ella).
The intelligent reader – who is still capable of thinking, after this introduction – will notice that at the end of the sentence you are told it was given to her (or she). So why was there an undetermined recipient at the beginning of the sentence, if the recipient was determined at the end of the sentence.
This is where Spanish take grammar torture to infernal levels of Schadenfreude cruelty.
In Spanish, the undetermined pronoun for the indirect object is always required, the clarifying pronoun is not.
You can say: I gave it /Lo di → (lit. It [I] gave, with the I being understood by the verb conjugation)
But you cannot say I gave it to her / Lo di a ella
unless you add: (to an undetermined recipient) /Se
(to an undetermined recipient) I gave it to her.
Of course, what you are really saying is:
Se lo di a ella.
The Spanish absolutely requires that any and every sentence be constructed as confusingly as possible. It is a basic rule of grammar. If any sentence is clear, ideally there should be a way to make it ambiguous, preferably incomprehensible.
They like to say Spanish derives this grammar from Latin. Maybe so. I never studied Latin. I am sure I would have hated the Romans, had I been forced to study Latin. In fact, I am positive that most insurrections against the Roman Empire were the result of grammar.
I, myself, think this grammar was a trick of Jesuit fiends grinding the torture engines of the Inquisition. How could one even question the Inquisition’s methods, if one was incapable of even asking a question?
Today’s Closing Spanish Thought
I have only begun to touch on the horrors of the Spanish pronoun. There is more villainy to come.
And with the Spanish language, you won’t know who it came from, or where it was going.
May 5, 2021 – Edited: Made mobile friendly. August 25, 2024 – Edited: Added clarification.
