[quote=AKenquirer;6043245]   How does this answer my question?   I believe he is pointing out the hypocritical, double standerd of the Zionists.       I asked how whites justify their condemnation of Israel for what it's trying to do to the Palestinians, when whites did essentially the same thing to the Indians in America.   Not quite. You see when Whites first arrived in America, the vast majority of it was a completely uncivilized and untamed wilderness, sparsely populated by stone aged savages. Many of the first Whites to come to America had already established villages and settlements before they had even seen their first indian. By the time these painted faced savages showed up at their new settlement and raided it, burned it, raped the women, killed the babies by smashing their heads against the wall, etc... Well there wasn't any going back then.     On the other hand, Palestine was not an uncivilized and untamed wilderness, sparsely populated by scattered small groups of stone aged savages. It was already an established country, far from being a savage, stone aged wilderness. Zionists are not pioneers, they are straight out thieves.    It's not exactly the same thing.      When WNs condemn Israel, are they doing it just to stick it to the Jews, or is their condemnation out of genuine sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians?   I think a little of both;)      Jews came to Palestine, kicked out the Palestinians,    Yeah, Zionists are A-holes aren't they?    Whites came to America,    Yep. Discovered it without knowing there were even any other people(if you really consider stone aged savages actual people) living here. Zionists knew full and well that there were Palestinians in Palestine I think...    killed or drove off the Indians,   Only because the indians started it.    claimed the land as their own, and are now trying to secure their country. What's the difference?   The difference is, when the Dutch landed at Manhattan they bought the entire island with some liquor, beads, pots and pans and other trinkets, purchased it fair and square. The Europeans bought and paid for much of the land, fair and square. Then even after they had bought and paid for it and shook hands. The indians would come back and attack them again as soon as their fire water supply was running low. This is where the expression indian giver comes from, the indians could never keep their word. They would agree to sell a plot of land to the Whites for some guns, horses and liquor, it would be a done deal. Then the indians would get drunk on that same liquor and take those same guns and horses and decide to go back on their word and attack the pale faces and steal some horses, rape and kidnap some White women and kill or kidnap some White children anyways, just for shi#s n' giggles. I'm afraid the situation between the Americans and indians and Zionists and Palestinians is not so parallel as you like to think.