NNNotes~

Oran 2022-04-07 08:01:02

In 1947, the UN formulated a two-state solution, with Judaism (Christianity) in Israel, and Arabs (Islam) in Baal, but Judaism was too unpopular in the Middle East, let alone a "Jewish state".

In 1948, when Israel seceded from Britain, the neighboring countries could not help declaring war to kill the Jewish state (World War I). In order to win, Baal was unlucky and divided up, and Baal refugees wandered everywhere.

In 1956, Britain and France wooed Israel to fight Egypt and wanted to control the canal (World War II). The United States did not see Britain and France as good. In the end, Israel got a bargain.

In 1964, Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon established PLOs to claim that they wanted to help Bale regain their territory, but in fact they disgusted Israel.

In 1967, Israel was disgusted and vomited, and launched a lightning attack (three wars), and the Arabs lost their land.

In 1973, Egypt and Syria refused to accept and fought in Israel (four wars), and finally signed a tie (Israeli Prime Minister was assassinated by Jewish radicals as a traitor).

At the same time, PLO was too disgusting and was driven to Lebanon by Jordan (Christian (Jewish) mainly), and Lebanon had many Bale refugees after World War I (Islam (Muslim) mainly). As soon as PLO arrived in Lebanon, they couldn't get used to the madness of Christianity. In the end, the conflict escalated, abbreviated as "Jewish (Christ) VS Baal (Muslim)".

In 1982, Israel was disgusted by PLO again, and fought with PLO in Syria and Lebanon (five battles) to win.

In August of the same year, the pro-Israel Lebanese President was assassinated by the PLO, and the Jewish Christian Civilian Army ran to the Beirut refugee concentration camp to slaughter Bale Muslims with the support of Israel, which was condemned internationally, and Sharon resigned.

Lebanon became more and more chaotic, forming a situation of "Israel+Jewish Christ VS Syria+Baal Muslims", and finally Israel and Syria successfully controlled the south and north respectively.

View more about The Insult reviews

Extended Reading
  • Ariel 2022-04-12 09:01:10

    The two said it was just a personal issue, but in fact it was a dispute arising from the appearance of hatred between the country and the family. At the same time, the director also reminded that one thing should not be intercepted to see the phenomenon, but must be completely analyzed to see the essence. The idea of ​​this script is good. It spreads from one point, and the quarrel of the individual spreads to the political status quo of the country and the historical rift between the ethnic groups. The cumulative energy is snowballing. [B]

  • Arch 2022-04-16 09:01:09

    #DocumentaryPhoto# First watch "What's Home" and then watch "Shame", the logic before and after all makes sense. The refugee issue in Lebanon (especially Palestine refugees) is the most sensitive area in the country, involving religious beliefs, political positions, survival and human rights. The lawyer's words are sharp, "In this country, Palestinians are just as embarrassed as gypsies, small traders, black people, and homosexuals." The national sensational trial in the film is actually just a national reagent, used to show the intricate and intertwined And move the whole body of religious disputes and ethnic conflicts. In the face of such a film, you have little to say other than awe and silent contemplation.

The Insult quotes

  • Wajdi Wehbe: Wajdi Wehbe: No one has a monopoly on suffering.