One Response

  1. Thomas Swenson at |

    At least two problems with this article. Firstly, the comparison of the criminal-robber Zionist entity with Prussia is false in several aspects. Prussia did not come into being by forcing native inhabitants out of their homes and banning their return. Also, when Prussia invaded and annexed territory, it did not evict the inhabitants. The invasions resulted in a change in political administration, but relatively not much else. Even today in Germany, the Danish minority in Schleswig-Holstein persists and is guaranteed proportional political representation.
    Secondly, the Zionist entity has always been illegitimate in a moral sense. Whether the Zionist-pig entity occupies pre-1967 territory or not, it is illegitimate. The occupation is irrelevant both in a legal and a moral sense. Of course, the occupation is devastating as a practical matter. But, discussing the occupation as if it were relevant to legitimacy is nonsensical and misleading.

    [Reply]

    Reply

Leave a Reply