# Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered



## Daryl Hunt (May 1, 2018)

Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.

Now, MBS says, it’s time to make a deal or “shut up and stop complaining”:


According to my sources, the Saudi Crown Prince told the Jewish leaders:

“In the last several decades the Palestinian leadership has missed one opportunity after the other and rejected all the peace proposals it was given. It is about time the Palestinians take the proposals and agree to come to the negotiations table or shut up and stop complaining.”

MBS also made two other points on the Palestinian issue during the meeting:


He made clear the Palestinian issue was not a top priority for the Saudi government or Saudi public opinion. MBS said Saudi Arabia “has much more urgent and important issues to deal with” like confronting Iran’s influence in the region.
Regardless of all his criticism of the Palestinian leadership, MBS also made clear that in order for Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states to normalize relations with Israel there will have to be significant progress on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
Under MBS’ leadership since taking effective power in June 2017, Saudi Arabia has aligned itself far more with the West. Decrees from the royal palace are now allowing women to drive and to dress in something other than black abayas and niqabs while in public. MBS has opened cinemas in Saudi Arabia for the first time in decades. He’s either cleaning up corruption or purging dissidents and hardliners, but either way MBS is making sure that he directs public policy for Saudi Arabia for the next several decades, and directs it to come closer to the West.

The main intention of all this appears to be an effort to isolate Iran, which has become an existential threat to Sunni power in the region. Our invasion and then abandonment of Iraq didn’t help in that effort, which is why even the previous crown prince took a distinctly cool approach to Barack Obama at the end of his presidency. MBS knows that he’ll have to modernize in order to make Western nations comfortable with any partnership for the region, and that the glut on oil markets means that the Saudis can’t simply use energy as leverage any more.

Unfortunately for the Palestinians, they’ve been playing footsie with Tehran more than Riyadh, and now they’re going to pay for it. Choosing sides has consequences, and with the stakes as high as they are now, the Saudis see the Palestinians as dispensable. They’d rather ally openly with Israel to keep Iran at bay, and the best way to do that is for the Palestinians to take a deal and get on with their lives.

Unfortunately again for the Palestinians, they still can’t decide _what_ they want, or even how to discuss it:

A powerful but rarely convened assembly that calls itself the Palestinian “supreme authority” meets for the first time in 22 years on Monday, but boycotts and rifts suggest it will struggle to achieve its stated goal of unity against Israel and the United States.

President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to use the four-day Palestinian National Council (PNC) meeting to renew his legitimacy and to install loyalists in powerful positions to begin shaping his legacy.

Abbas has billed the meeting of the Palestinian National Council (PNC), the de facto parliament of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, as a chance to establish a united front against Israel and the United States, after President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

The hardline Islamists in Hamas and Islamic Jihad, both of which are aligned with Iran, have boycotted the event, ostensibly because its West Bank location puts them at risk of arrest by Israel. But Reuters notes that three factions of the PLO are also boycotting, in part because they believe Abbas hasn’t been open enough to working with IJ or Hamas. The event is seen as an anachronism by other Palestinians, a desperate attempt by Abbas to emphasize his legitimacy as the Palestinian Authority leader while being largely ignored by all sides.

The Saudis have had enough. Perhaps Abbas should take MBS’ advice and cut a deal while he still can.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...




Too late for that!!! They were offered approx. 95 percent of the W Bank, almost all of E. Jerusalem, obviously all of Gaza and they still rejected it! They get  NOTHING !!!


----------



## cnm (May 2, 2018)

C'mon, they get an apartheid regime, that's not nothing.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...


What the Pals want is simple, they want freedom.  They want an end to the illegal and immoral occupation of Palestinian land by the Israeli's.  They want Israel to respect international law and human rights.  Human rights, that's something MBS and his Saudi bitches, don't respect.

The Palestinians have bent over backwards trying to appease Israel and all they've gotten in return, is more suffering.

If MBS wants more contact with the west, maybe he should tell us why he sent 19 hijackers to the US in 2001?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Too late for that!!! They were offered approx. 95 percent of the W Bank, almost all of E. Jerusalem, obviously all of Gaza and they still rejected it! They get  NOTHING !!!


You can't offer what you don't have.  And the West Bank is NOT Israeli property!


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Daryl Hunt said:
> 
> 
> > Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> ...


What a load of bullshit.  The Palestinians never ended the second intifada, they just became less successful at carrying out attacks.  The only freedom they appear to want is the freedom to murder Jews.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Too late for that!!! They were offered approx. 95 percent of the W Bank, almost all of E. Jerusalem, obviously all of Gaza and they still rejected it! They get  NOTHING !!!
> ...


Are you crazy?  You may think Israel shouldn't have Judea and Samaria, but clearly Israel does have it.


----------



## evenflow1969 (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...


We now have one of the few times in history that I have or am going to have agreed with a saudi prince!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Too late for that!!! They were offered approx. 95 percent of the W Bank, almost all of E. Jerusalem, obviously all of Gaza and they still rejected it! They get  NOTHING !!!
> ...



 I love ❤️ these Pro Pal Kool Aid Drinkers! Gaza , E. Jerusalen and the W. Bank were part of Egypt and Jordan ; not “ Palestine”
 Nasser declared to the World it was his intention to destroy the Jewish State prior to the 67 War.   Please tell us why the U.N. the “ peacekeepers” left just before the War broke out?   Just more proof that” International Law” is a joke and not worth the paper it’s written on


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Daryl Hunt said:
> 
> 
> > Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> ...


 
Please tell us exactly how the Palestinians have “ bent over backwards” trying to appease Israel.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> What a load of bullshit.  The Palestinians never ended the second intifada, they just became less successful at carrying out attacks.  The only freedom they appear to want is the freedom to murder Jews.


Wrong!  The illegal and immoral occupation is the cause of all the violence in that area.  End the occupation and you end the violence.  Palestinians have every right in the world to defend themselves from foreign aggression.  Get that through your fucking asshole head!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Are you crazy?  You may think Israel shouldn't have Judea and Samaria, but clearly Israel does have it.


There isn't a single country on the planet that agrees with you.  And there are over 200 UN resolutions that say you are full of shit!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> I love ❤️ these Pro Pal Kool Aid Drinkers! Gaza , E. Jerusalen and the W. Bank were part of Egypt and Jordan ; not “ Palestine”
> Nasser declared to the World it was his intention to destroy the Jewish State prior to the 67 War.   Please tell us why the U.N. the “ peacekeepers” left just before the War broke out?   Just more proof that” International Law” is a joke and not worth the paper it’s written on


It is not important who owned that land prior to '67.  The only thing that is important is that Israel didn't! You cannot hold onto land seized in a war.  If you disagree, then you are saying it was okay for Hitler to annex Poland.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Please tell us exactly how the Palestinians have “ bent over backwards” trying to appease Israel.


Well, off the top of my head, by not breaking any of the ceasefires.  If Israel wanted peace, they'd stop all the daily missile strikes, drone strikes, immoral and illegal blockade, shooting unarmed Palestinians, etc.

Israel doesn't want peace and they've done nothing to make it happen.


----------



## Hollie (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Please tell us exactly how the Palestinians have “ bent over backwards” trying to appease Israel.
> ...



Are you people given a script to read after Friday prayers at your madrassah?


----------



## Hollie (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > What a load of bullshit.  The Palestinians never ended the second intifada, they just became less successful at carrying out attacks.  The only freedom they appear to want is the freedom to murder Jews.
> ...



Oddly, the Korans are drenched in Jew hatreds. 

Not coincidentally, there is every reason to believe that acts of Islamic terrorism by “Pal’istanians” would continue irrespective of any blockade. 

Have you read the Hamas charter?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > What a load of bullshit.  The Palestinians never ended the second intifada, they just became less successful at carrying out attacks.  The only freedom they appear to want is the freedom to murder Jews.
> ...



Wrong !!  What a bunch of BULLSHIT !!!  The Israelis have been “ occupying” since 1948?? FUCK YOURSELF !!!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 2, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



 Don’t confuse the Pro Palestinian Kool
Aid drinker with the facts


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Please tell us exactly how the Palestinians have “ bent over backwards” trying to appease Israel.
> ...



Israel is conducting daily missile  strikes, drone   Strikes, and shooting UNARMED Palestinians? Someone tell the media so they can start broadcasting! 
     What is the “ illegal blockade” stopping Hamas from smuggling weapons?  Tough SHIT! The Palestinians don’t want peace and they have done nothing to contribute to the “ peace process”


----------



## GHook93 (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...



This guy is so spot on! The corrupt Palestinians leaders reject one offer after another. Even an offer giving them 98% of the land they demand. That offer will never be back. 



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > I love ❤️ these Pro Pal Kool Aid Drinkers! Gaza , E. Jerusalen and the W. Bank were part of Egypt and Jordan ; not “ Palestine”
> ...



  The above is actually hilarious. The U.N. who is supposed to enforce “ International Law” deliberately leaves the area; The Arabs and the U.N who believe in “ International Law” didn’t believe in it in 1967. We all know that if Israel had lost “ International Law” wouldn’t be something that would be mentioned. It’s a joke; Really.
   Comparing the 67 War to WW11? You are both stupid and Psychotic. Hitler INITIATED the War with Poland. That is the difference. Get it? Of course not. FUCK YOU.    I


----------



## Daryl Hunt (May 2, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Daryl Hunt said:
> 
> 
> > Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> ...



It's not too late.  The PLO has been offered many different deals and have reject each and every one.  And most have been more generous than anything I would have offered.  I think they should be offered half of Jerusalem and the West Bank and nothing more.  I believe that the rest of the world would accept that deal with the exception of Iran who just wants to keep the pot boiling.


----------



## admonit (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl Hunt said:
> ...


What can be more?
And yes, it's too late.


----------



## Daryl Hunt (May 2, 2018)

admonit said:


> Daryl Hunt said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...



Tell me why it's too late?  Just using the blanket statement doesn't cut it.  Why is it too late?


----------



## admonit (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl Hunt said:
> ...


Because the situation has changed. Today no one serious Israeli politician would discuss your "half of Jerusalem and the West Bank and nothing more."
Time is a very important factor and you cannot ignore political changes in Israel as well as changes in the American policy toward Arab-Israel conflict.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > What a load of bullshit.  The Palestinians never ended the second intifada, they just became less successful at carrying out attacks.  The only freedom they appear to want is the freedom to murder Jews.
> ...


Once again, just another mindless rant.  Do you have no interest in the issues here at all?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Are you crazy?  You may think Israel shouldn't have Judea and Samaria, but clearly Israel does have it.
> ...


No, no one with an ounce of intelligence disagrees with what I said and no UN resolution contradicts it.  You are just too stupid to understand what I said.


----------



## Daryl Hunt (May 2, 2018)

admonit said:


> Daryl Hunt said:
> 
> 
> > admonit said:
> ...



And why not?  It's always been offered in the past.  And a lot more.  It's never been Israel that has turned it down.  It's been the Palestinians that has bounced it.  It's been for Israel to just pick up and move or nothing. This is what the Saudi Prince is talking about.  Peace can be had if the PLO decided it really wanted it.  And they can have their own country.  But they would have to recognize Israels right to exist.  And they just won't do that.  Saudi, Jordan, Egypt and most of the other Middle Eastern and North African Countries have recognized Israels right to exist already.  Only Iran, Syria and the Palestinians haven't.  I can understand why Iran and Syria don't.  They stay in power by blaming all their woes on the Jews.  But the PLO self inflicts as long as they buy into the lie.  The second they decide the want peace and their own country, Israel is willing and able to work with them.  And so are most of the other Arab Countries.  it's not too late if the PLO really wants it.


----------



## Indeependent (May 2, 2018)

cnm said:


> C'mon, they get an apartheid regime, that's not nothing.


They were handed an entire infrastructure and destroyed it.


----------



## Indeependent (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl Hunt said:
> ...


Because Israel “cares” so much about what the rest of the world thinks.
They don’t seem to give a shit when Israel is being attacked.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl Hunt said:
> ...


Offer them what?  The PA already has civil control of more than 40% of Judea and Samaria where more than 90% of the Palestinians live, and for security reasons the IDF must continue to operate throughout the area, so there can be no fully sovereign Palestinian state anywhere in Judea and Samaria.  What this means is that in terms of land and sovereignty the status quo is as good as it gets.


----------



## Daryl Hunt (May 2, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Daryl Hunt said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...



It can get a lot better.  If the PLO were to publicly recognize Israels right to exist and sit down with Israel in direct talks things could get a lot better and Israel wouldn't need to patrol like that.  And it would allow for Israel to deal with Hamas once and for all.  I think it's stupid to break Palestine up into two parts like that.  The Gaza Strip should not be part of the deal especially since Hamas will NEVER even get along with the PLO much less with anyone else.  They seem to enjoy war and putting the people in the Gaza strip in harms way on a daily basis from both Israel and Egypt.  If there was an undersea country to the north of them I am sure that Hamas would figure out a way to attack them as well.  It's up to the PLO to make the next move to peace and the establishment of Palestine as a Sovereign Nation.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl Hunt said:
> ...


If you recall, during the second intifada, the PLO was even more aggressive than Hamas in promoting terror attacks against Israel, and more recently it lauded the so called "knife intifada" and further, half of every dollar the PLO/PA receives from foreign donors goes to pay terrorists to kill Jews, so there is no rational basis for believing the PLO is any different from Hamas.  The only reason the PLO may appear to be different from Hamas is that the IDF and other Israeli security forces operate through Judea and Samaria but not in Gaza any longer; otherwise the PLO would also be digging tunnels and firing rockets at Israel.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl Hunt said:
> ...


 
They already gave up Gaza, offered almost all of the W. Bank and E. Jerusalem which was turned down. Please tell us why it’s not too late


----------



## Roudy (May 2, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...


Arab countries are finally realizing that this blind idiotic support of the Palestinians and everything they do has been nothing but DEAD WEIGHT on the progress and best interests of their country and people.


----------



## Daryl Hunt (May 2, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Daryl Hunt said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



It sounds like the PLO needs to do a rethink and the UN needs to cut it's crap and stand up to the PLO instead of condemning Israel.  Throwing rocks, flaming cocktails and broken glass at the security force will get you shot every time.  But the PLO keeps doing it just like Hamas keeps doing it.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Wrong !!  What a bunch of BULLSHIT !!!  The Israelis have been “ occupying” since 1948?? FUCK YOURSELF !!!


You're the fuckers who _moved_ here; they're the fuckers who _were_ here.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Don’t confuse the Pro Palestinian Kool
> Aid drinker with the facts


Prove I'm wrong!


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong !!  What a bunch of BULLSHIT !!!  The Israelis have been “ occupying” since 1948?? FUCK YOURSELF !!!
> ...


How is that even relevant unless you are a racist?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Israel is conducting daily missile  strikes, drone   Strikes, and shooting UNARMED Palestinians? Someone tell the media so they can start broadcasting!


Israel won't allow the media into the area.  Probably because it has something to hide?



ILOVEISRAEL said:


> What is the “ illegal blockade” stopping Hamas from smuggling weapons?  Tough SHIT! The Palestinians don’t want peace and they have done nothing to contribute to the “ peace process”


Are you saying they don't have a right to defend themselves?  Well, you need weapons for that.  

You fuckers don't deserve a country.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Once again, just another mindless rant.  Do you have no interest in the issues here at all?


Are you saying the Palestinians don't have a right to defend themselves?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > No, no one with an ounce of intelligence disagrees with what I said and no UN resolution contradicts it.  You are just too stupid to understand what I said.
> ...


You may produce any and all UN Resolutions, and anything else you can come up with.

Resolutions have no legal standing.  No one is obliged to follow what those resolutions say.  And the UN knows it.

You are not the only one who does not seem to know that and keeps crowing about them.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, just another mindless rant.  Do you have no interest in the issues here at all?
> ...


The only people the Palestinians have to defend themselves against are their own leaders who are leading them to disaster after disaster and mindless bigots like you who encourage their suffering.  Israel wants to make peace with the Palestinian people.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > No, no one with an ounce of intelligence disagrees with what I said and no UN resolution contradicts it.  You are just too stupid to understand what I said.
> ...


If you were not quite so stupid, would understand that 242 addresses only the parties to the 1967 war and has nothing to do with the Palestinians.  Of the three Arab nations that lose land to Israel in that war, Israel has made peace with two of them, Egypt and Jordan, and has repeatedly offered to return the Golan to Syria in return for peace, but Syria has consistently refused.  You are not only a bigot, but with each post you demonstrate you are an especially stupid and ignorant bigot.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> The only people the Palestinians have to defend themselves against are their own leaders who are leading them to disaster after disaster and mindless bigots like you who encourage their suffering.  Israel wants to make peace with the Palestinian people.


If Israel wanted peace, it wouldn't violate the ceasefires.  If Israel wanted peace, it would end the occupation.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> And it has absolutely NOTHING to do with this thread.


I felt obligated to respond to your post.  And this resolution and many others like it, mean that the point in the OP of this thread, is moot.  There is no reason for Israel to offer any deal, the only option here is for Israel to get the fuck off land that isn't theirs.


----------



## flacaltenn (May 2, 2018)

cnm said:


> C'mon, they get an apartheid regime, that's not nothing.



It's not apartheid if the "oppressed" don't WANT to be citizens. Go find me any Palestinians that want to have Israeli citizenship and rights. That's NOT their demand.

It's still an occupation that has gone on too long. And when they Palestinians HAVE leadership and representation that is serious about statehood -- maybe they'll negotiate.


----------



## flacaltenn (May 2, 2018)

*There are existing sticky threads to hash out 100 year old history. Aint gonna happen in EVERY thread in this forum. OP scope of topic is CLEARLY recent events in the "negotiations". Please confine the discussion to opinion and facts that are germane to CURRENT peace discussions. *


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > How is that even relevant unless you are a racist?
> ...


If you were not a bigot, you would not think this is relevant.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 2, 2018)

flacaltenn said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > C'mon, they get an apartheid regime, that's not nothing.
> ...


Just to clarify.
There are Arabs who are citizens of Israel, in Israel.
There are Arabs who are residents of Israel, in Israel.
Arabs who live in Gaza or areas A or B of Judea and Samaria, are neither residents, nor citizens of Israel.

Many Arabs living in "East Jerusalem" are seeking Israeli citizenship, not wanting to become citizens of any future  "State of Palestine".

The demands of the people in Gaza and Areas A and B, is for Israel to cease to exist, as they have been doing since 1948, after they failed to stop the Jews from achieving Statehood.

There is no Jewish/ Israeli occupation in Judea and Samaria.  Both Jews and Arabs were to have their own areas with the partition the Arabs refused twice.

The money needs to stop coming to Gaza and the PA.
Weapons need to stop coming to Gaza and the PA.

Neither has any incentive to stop how the leaders do things if they continue to get what they want from Iran, Qatar, the EU, UN, UNWRA and others who are keeping this conflict going.

This war would have ended in 1973 had it not been for the endless money and incentive to continue which has continued to come from all of the above.

Egypt and Jordan sought a Peace Treaty because the countries were suffering economically.

Stopping the flow of cash and support, and putting an end to UNWRA, will do what is needed to put an end to the hostilities and demand for Israel's destruction which continues to come from all the terror groups and the PA.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > The only people the Palestinians have to defend themselves against are their own leaders who are leading them to disaster after disaster and mindless bigots like you who encourage their suffering.  Israel wants to make peace with the Palestinian people.
> ...


If you had a brain, you wouldn't post such nonsense.  Israel wants peace, but the leadership of the Palestinians want war, and it seems you do, too.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> If you were not a bigot, you would not think this is relevant.


Nice strawman.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> If you had a brain, you wouldn't post such nonsense.  Israel wants peace, but the leadership of the Palestinians want war, and it seems you do, too.


It's not nonsense, its a historical fact.  And how can you possibly say Israel wants peace, when they shoot innocent, un-armed Palestinians?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

flacaltenn said:


> *There are existing sticky threads to hash out 100 year old history. Aint gonna happen in EVERY thread in this forum. OP scope of topic is CLEARLY recent events in the "negotiations". Please confine the discussion to opinion and facts that are germane to CURRENT peace discussions. *


Current peace negotiations, are predicated on the "right of return".  You cannot talk about who wants to return, by omitting why they were forced to leave in the first place.


----------



## flacaltenn (May 2, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > *There are existing sticky threads to hash out 100 year old history. Aint gonna happen in EVERY thread in this forum. OP scope of topic is CLEARLY recent events in the "negotiations". Please confine the discussion to opinion and facts that are germane to CURRENT peace discussions. *
> ...



Most of the Palestinians are still right where they were when that land was taken in War from Jordan. It is what it is and the fact Billo is --- The Palis don't have ANOTHER 50 years to organize and do something about it. 

Time moves on. You gotta deal with where it is NOW and fix it. And we can't have EVERY THREAD in that forum going off in all directions over 1340 years of history. 

My deal is --- I WANT to fix it. I want a Pali homeland. And neither you or I are doing them ANY good whatsoever sitting here talking about 1948... 

The thread is about the IMPORTANT event of Arab neighbors showing INTEREST in reaching some kind of plan. That's a good thing. It should be discussed. Because YOU and I ain't gonna solve this. If the Palis can't get their shit together in a govt without killing each other ----  maybe the NEIGHBORHOOD has to do it for them.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 2, 2018)

flacaltenn said:


> Most of the Palestinians are still right where they were when that land was taken in War from Jordan. It is what it is and the fact Billo is --- The Palis don't have ANOTHER 50 years to organize and do something about it.
> 
> Time moves on. You gotta deal with where it is NOW and fix it. And we can't have EVERY THREAD in that forum going off in all directions over 1340 years of history.
> 
> ...


Then tell the Zionists, "You were driven out 2000 years ago, it's too late to come back now!"

You keep pointing to the Palestinians and expecting "THEM" to do something.  They are a population under the occupation of a foreign force.  They can only do what that foreign force allows.

There is nothing to negotiate.  Israel has to end the occupation.  Period.  That's what has to happen for peace to occur.


----------



## flacaltenn (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> They are a population under the occupation of a foreign force. They can only do what that foreign force allows.



They HAD a functioning govt with cooperation from Israel just 10 or so years ago. With building their own security forces and instituting their own justice system. Got so damn GOOD that Israel GAVE them Gaza. Purged every Jew and every gefilte fish out of there and PROMISED to arrange for air and sea ports. 

Next election -- the Palis have an open war in the streets KILLING each other over control of Gaza. Not ISRAEL destroying their govt.  So maybe THEY can't do this. And the key to getting a sovereign state is to have the ARAB neighbors and Israel put one in Trust for them until they get their act together. 

That's why the Arab neighbors are taking a whole new angle on this in past couple years. and THAT is what the OP is about.


----------



## rylah (May 3, 2018)

When talking about "foreign occupation" one has to remember it works both ways.
From what I see this is just another attempt to frame the problem in such a manner that both sides can disagree forever. Because occupation can be easily turned to mean  "Jewish presence".

Jews don't occupy any of their homeland, they are there by natural right.
Arabs begin to come to terms with this most basic evident fact.

Not PLO or Hamas of course, those become irrelevant by the day thinking they'll get rid of Israel, when in reality it's the core player in an alliance between regional powers, that turn towards it in cooperation and alliance.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > The only people the Palestinians have to defend themselves against are their own leaders who are leading them to disaster after disaster and mindless bigots like you who encourage their suffering.  Israel wants to make peace with the Palestinian people.
> ...


What do you mean by end the occupation?
When Israel offered 98% of the land the Palestinians demanded they turned it down. How can they end the occupation better than that!?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > The only people the Palestinians have to defend themselves against are their own leaders who are leading them to disaster after disaster and mindless bigots like you who encourage their suffering.  Israel wants to make peace with the Palestinian people.
> ...





flacaltenn said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > They are a population under the occupation of a foreign force. They can only do what that foreign force allows.
> ...


 
Israel offered them almost everything they asked for and they refused. Subject is closed


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 3, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



 They don’t want 98 percent; they want 100 percent, “ Right of Return” which could in time make the Israelis the minority,and demanding they have control over a possible highway between Gaza and the W. Bank which is on Israeli territory , PLUS release of Palestinian prisoners. They are deliberately making demands they know Israel Is not going to agree to .


----------



## admonit (May 3, 2018)

flacaltenn said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > C'mon, they get an apartheid regime, that's not nothing.
> ...


And if they want but are denied Israeli citizenship, it's apartheid? 
Palestinians have no more rights to Israeli nationality than any other foreigners have. Given their hatred toward Israel, any consideration of such rights is an absurd.
Many Palestinians not only want Israeli citizenship or residency right, they dream about it. Thousands Palestinian men married fictively Israeli Arab women to get Israeli citizenship. Thousands East Jerusalem Arab residents ask for Israeli citizenship. They hate the Jewish state, but they love to enjoy its welfare.


> It's still an occupation that has gone on too long.


It's still their hate toward the Jewish people and the Jewish state that has gone on too long. That's why any discussion here about possible solution of the conflict has no sense. Too late.


----------



## there4eyeM (May 3, 2018)

"Nobody's right when everybody's wrong. (There's a man with a gun over there, tellin' me I got to beware)."


----------



## flacaltenn (May 3, 2018)

admonit said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...



There are thriving Pali cities in the West Bank.. It's NOT "too late" for some accommodations. Maybe THEY can't do it. Maybe it needs to be done FOR them. Until they accept the burdens and responsibility of self government. 

And on the citizenship issue --- if there was a settlement that gave some autonomy to Palestinians, there MIGHT be some Palis choose to remain in Israeli areas. If they PREFER it to the Pali state in whatever form it might be -- they'd probably be reliable citizens of Israel..


----------



## cnm (May 3, 2018)

Indeependent said:


> They were handed an entire infrastructure and destroyed it.


You forget the blockade they got with it.


----------



## cnm (May 3, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> There is no Jewish/ Israeli occupation in Judea and Samaria.


How about in the West Bank?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 3, 2018)

cnm said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > They were handed an entire infrastructure and destroyed it.
> ...


The blockade did not happen until the Arabs started firing rockets into Israel.  And have not stopped to this day.

The aim is to destroy Israel, and take the land back into Muslim hands, as it was after the Ottomans defeated the Crusaders and took over the land for 500 years.

They prefer being mistreated by other Muslims, rather than treated well by the Jews.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 3, 2018)

cnm said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > There is no Jewish/ Israeli occupation in Judea and Samaria.
> ...


It ceased to be "The West Bank" when Jordan relinquished the land they had conquered in the war of 1948.

It had always been known as Judea and Samaria.

Judea = the Tribe of Judah = the Jews

Since it is Jewish Land, there can be no Jewish "Occupation" of their own land.  That would be an oxymoron.  Like saying that the Aboriginal people "occupy" Australia.


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

cnm said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > They were handed an entire infrastructure and destroyed it.
> ...


The blockade came afterwards.


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

cnm said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > There is no Jewish/ Israeli occupation in Judea and Samaria.
> ...


How about that war Jordan lost, Muzzie boy?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

Indeependent said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


It doesn't matter. It was not Jordan's land to lose.


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


Yes it was.
And lose it they did.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

Indeependent said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


You need to read up. Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank but it is illegal to annex occupied territory so that failed.


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Jordan used a piece of land to launch an attack.
Israel kicked their ass and took control of that land.
Assholes such as yourself have been crying about this for 50 years and haven’t done shit about it.
And quite frankly, an insignificant piece of zero keyboard warrior such as yourself will continue to cry about this until you die a lonely death in your nursing home room.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

Indeependent said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


Why do you think it is called Occupied Palestinian Territory?


----------



## Hollie (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Actually, its called the disputed territories.

Arabs-Moslems claiming territory as a _waqf_ (a religious endowment), merely in furtherance of the musings of an Arab warlord is not a reliable argument.


----------



## rylah (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



*Q. Why do You think Arabs call it the "Jewish Desert"?*


*Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎ 

The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew: מִדְבַּר יְהוּדָה‎ _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_ or _Judaean Desert_; Arabic: _Sahara Yahudan_) is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


Only by Israel.


----------



## Hollie (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



False. The Hamas charter specifically makes a reference to the term waqf (in connection to the land of Israel). 

The Avalon Project : Hamas Covenant 1988

*Article Eleven:*
The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day. This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Moslem generations till Judgement Day?



The inventor of your politico-religious ideology, Muhammad (swish), had this cute idea that all lands previously conquered in gee-had belonged to islamics in perpetuity.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > If you had a brain, you wouldn't post such nonsense.  Israel wants peace, but the leadership of the Palestinians want war, and it seems you do, too.
> ...


Obviously, "innocent" is another word you don't understand.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > If you were not a bigot, you would not think this is relevant.
> ...


So you wanted to tell us you don't know what the word, strawman, means?


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


By whom?
Educated people do not refer to that piece of land as such.


----------



## flacaltenn (May 3, 2018)

cnm said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > They were handed an entire infrastructure and destroyed it.
> ...



The blockade was the RESULT of their Civil War for control of Gaza. And Hamas rising to power there. Did NOT come with the original deal in a true blockade form. It's not a UNILATERAL blockade either. Egypt has similar policies in place at their border with Gaza and is fighting ISIS and other radical groups in the Sinai..


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


 
Yes, right. That is why there was no condemnation from the “ International Community” about Egypt and Jordan being “ occupiers” What a joke


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


  Because Israel has it. If it belonged to Jordan nobody would refer to them as “ occupiers”


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

flacaltenn said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


It wasn't a civil war.

You need to read up.


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


Egypt has a Gaza blockade, P F Asshat.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


Did either of them kick Palestinians off their land?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

Indeependent said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


And we had a coup in Egypt to make sure that happens.


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


If not, why are Gazans murdering them?
See how stupid you are?


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You’ve never been to the Middle East, Asshat.
Once again, Asshat, why are Gazans sneaking into Egypt to murder Egyptians?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > cnm said:
> ...


Can Anyone End the Palestinian Civil War?

Hamas vs. Fatah: The Palestinian Civil War |  					 				Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Palestinian rivals Fatah, Hamas sign reconciliation accord


[ North and South in the USA] 
[Catholics and Protestants in Ireland] 
[North and South Korea ]
[North and South Vietnam ]
[Hamas and Fatah in Gaza ]

A civil war for power and territory is always a civil war for power and territory.


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


Asshat will respond...not.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

Indeependent said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


Link?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt has accused exiled Muslim Brotherhood officials of conspiring with Gaza-based Hamas militants to assassinate Public Prosecutor Hisham Barakat last year and arrested 14 people in connection with the attack.

CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt has accused exiled Muslim Brotherhood officials of conspiring with Gaza-based Hamas militants to assassinate Public Prosecutor Hisham Barakat last year and arrested 14 people in connection with the attack.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

Indeependent said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


*Gaza Bombshell*

In a story titled “Gaza Bombshell,” this week, Vanity Fair reported that the Palestinian civil war that killed dozens last summer was, in fact, the failed product of an American-backed attempt to oust the democratically-elected Hamas. News that the U.S. had backed such a plan, of course, isn’t really news (reports of the U.S. arming Fatah have long circulated), but it should be. If American faith in democracy is that malleable, it’s certainly too tenuous to be staking our reputation on abroad.

A press conference Bush held the day following the election said it all. The mood was awkward: after beating the drums for a Palestinian election for years and grooming Fatah with $2 million in the run-up to the election, when Hamas swept the vote with resounding turnout in a contest certified free and fair, Bush was stuck. So naturally, he hedged.

Gaza Bombshell


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


accused

That's good to know.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


The Bush administration foolishly believed that PA control of Gaza could lead to a "two state solution" but Hamas proved to Bush that a Palestinian state was not a viable option.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


The PA was in control of Gaza.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


No, Hamas was.  The PA and PLO are committed by treaty not to contest any part of pre 1967 Israel, but Hamas does, so Hamas cannot legitimately be part of the PA.


----------



## flacaltenn (May 3, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> “In the last several decades the Palestinian leadership has missed one opportunity after the other and rejected all the peace proposals it was given. It is about time the Palestinians take the proposals and agree to come to the negotiations table or shut up and stop complaining.”
> 
> MBS also made two other points on the Palestinian issue during the meeting:
> 
> ...



Back to the OP --- New Saudi Prince weighs in the same comment I've been making. The ball is in the Palestinians' court. His exact words are repeated above.

Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon have BIGGER issues right now with Iranian hegemony in the region. And they all have little confidence that the Palestinians can ORGANIZE a nationalist movement that results in a State because (in his words) .... "the Palestinian Leadership has missed one opportunity after another and rejected the peace proposals it was given"..   Sound familiar???

Exactly WHO are "the Palestinian leadership" right now? If you can't answer that -- you're not understanding the problem...


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


I *always* keep links from news stories.
The difference between us is that I read news stories and don’t have my head up my ass.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 3, 2018)

Indeependent said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


Nice duck.


----------



## Indeependent (May 3, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Just like Egypt and SA are ducking?
Your precious murderers are exposed.


----------



## xyz (May 3, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...


That's a good way to piss off most of the Arab world and perform a heavy licking on Drumpf's butt for more weapons.


----------



## member (May 3, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...



_*“In the last several decades the Palestinian leadership has missed one opportunity after the other and rejected all the peace proposals it was given. It is about time the Palestinians take the proposals and agree to come to the negotiations table or shut up and stop complaining.”*_

cool - plus, Saudi arabia [and  Prince] stepped out into the sunlight long enough from their cave-palace to......leave the 7th century and come into the 21st century allowing "some women folk" to lift their face-drapes, and let them drive.....

wooooo-weeeeee.  hot dog !  ......


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

flacaltenn said:


> They HAD a functioning govt with cooperation from Israel just 10 or so years ago. With building their own security forces and instituting their own justice system. Got so damn GOOD that Israel GAVE them Gaza. Purged every Jew and every gefilte fish out of there and PROMISED to arrange for air and sea ports.
> 
> Next election -- the Palis have an open war in the streets KILLING each other over control of Gaza. Not ISRAEL destroying their govt.  So maybe THEY can't do this. And the key to getting a sovereign state is to have the ARAB neighbors and Israel put one in Trust for them until they get their act together.
> 
> That's why the Arab neighbors are taking a whole new angle on this in past couple years. and THAT is what the OP is about.


That "functioning government with the cooperation of Israel" was the corrupt Fatah government that stood by and said nothing while the Israelis erected over 300 roadblocks and checkpoints on land Israel DOES NOT OWN!  The restrictions in the West Bank are unacceptable.  That's why the Pals voted for Hamas in a fair and democratic election.  Israel didn't like the results, because the Pals wouldn't vote for Israel's bitch.  The only reason Israel doesn't like Hamas, is because they refuse to be Israel's bitch.  Soon after the election in 2006, Israel began  the blockade to punish Gazans for voting for Hamas.

As for leaving Gaza, if you "effectively control" 80% of what comes in to and out of an area,  you haven't left.  That still satisfies the definition of an occupation.  Furthermore, if you're "arranging for air and sea ports", how can you have left?  Does Canada "arrange" for the airport at JFK in New York?  Air and seaports in Gaza, have nothing to do with Israel and Israel has nothing to say or "arrange" in regards to them.

As far as not destroying the Hamas government, what do you think the blockade is doing?  What do you think Israel launching raids into Gaza to kill members of Hamas is doing? 

There is nothing to negotiate and no deals to make.  Israel is in violation of international and the only option on the table is for Israel to unilaterally end the occupation.  And YOU need to stop defending all the inhuman acts of aggression Israel constantly makes on a daily basis in these occupied territories.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> What do you mean by end the occupation?
> When Israel offered 98% of the land the Palestinians demanded they turned it down. How can they end the occupation better than that!?


You can't offer what you don't have.  That's not Israeli land.  A home owner does not occupy his own home.  He owns it.  Israel needs to end the occupation by getting the fuck off land that isn't theirs.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Israel offered them almost everything they asked for and they refused. Subject is closed


There is nothing for Israel to offer; they just need to leave.  Subject is not closed.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> They don’t want 98 percent; they want 100 percent, “ Right of Return” which could in time make the Israelis the minority,and demanding they have control over a possible highway between Gaza and the W. Bank which is on Israeli territory , PLUS release of Palestinian prisoners. They are deliberately making demands they know Israel Is not going to agree to .


They have a right to 100% of the land that is not Israels.  As far as the road between Gaza and the WB, why don't the Israeli's make it a "toll road" and allow constant access.  That would be incoming revenue, which is a good thing.

The Palestinian prisoners are in administrative detention, which is a war crime.  They need to release all political prisoners and stop beating children under 12 that are in custody.

Populations under occupation cannot make demands on the occupier.

And finally, in regards to potential Jewish minority, don't blame the Pals because they fuck more than you do!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Obviously, "innocent" is another word you don't understand.


You can only use lethal force when your own life is threatened or the threat is imminent.  Standing there throwing a rock, or burning a tire, or yelling at your wailing Iron Curtain, are not threats to your life.  Standing there with a big media badge on them, is not a threat to your life. 

Maybe you should re-access your bullshit notion of "innocence"?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> So you wanted to tell us you don't know what the word, strawman, means?


You're posing an argument we are not arguing.  Whether or not I am a bigot, is not the issue.  Even you thinking I am, is not the issue.  So how is that NOT a strawman?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Obviously, "innocent" is another word you don't understand.
> ...


You continue to set new standards for stupidity.  A soldier can view an attack on his country as an attack on himself, and that means he can use deadly force whenever necessary to protect his country, in this case, to protect the fence that protects Israeli civilians from being attacked by Palestinian terrorists.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > So you wanted to tell us you don't know what the word, strawman, means?
> ...


The issue is if you were not a bigot, the fact that there were some people already living in Palestine when many of the Jews arrived would not seem significant.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> You continue to set new standards for stupidity.  A soldier can view an attack on his country as an attack on himself, and that means he can use deadly force whenever necessary to protect his country, in this case, to protect the fence that protects Israeli civilians from being attacked by Palestinian terrorists.


Throwing a rock is not an attack on your country, or your life.  For someone who holds such extremist views as yourself, maybe better off living in the Weimar Republic?

BTW, its not a fence, you moron, it's a concrete wall.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> The issue is if you were not a bigot, the fact that there were some people already living in Palestine when many of the Jews arrived would not seem significant.


More than just some.  They were the majority land owners when Jewish terrorist groups like Irgun, drove out 750,000 indigenous residents.  And it is the decedents of these indigenous residents that are demanding a right to return.  

And that _"right to return"_, is central to any peace agreement.  If the Jews can return after 2000 years, why can't the Pals return after 70?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > You continue to set new standards for stupidity.  A soldier can view an attack on his country as an attack on himself, and that means he can use deadly force whenever necessary to protect his country, in this case, to protect the fence that protects Israeli civilians from being attacked by Palestinian terrorists.
> ...





















Black smoke rises from tires burned by Gaza protesters at the border with Israel, with Israeli soldiers seen in the foreground, Friday, April 13, 2018. (AP Photo/Ariel Schalit)


WHERE is that concrete wall ????

Now try to discuss the protests in the proper thread and leave this one for what it was intended for.

Saudi Prince, not the only one, thinks that the Palestinian leaders should have accepted any of the deals they were offered.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > You continue to set new standards for stupidity.  A soldier can view an attack on his country as an attack on himself, and that means he can use deadly force whenever necessary to protect his country, in this case, to protect the fence that protects Israeli civilians from being attacked by Palestinian terrorists.
> ...


First it is a fence, and again you show you have no idea what you are arguing about.  Second, attacking the fence is an attack on Israel because the fence prevents Palestinian terrorists from attacking Israeli civilians.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> First it is a fence, and again you show you have no idea what you are arguing about.  Second, attacking the fence is an attack on Israel because the fence prevents Palestinian terrorists from attacking Israeli civilians.


This doesn't look like a fence to me.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > The issue is if you were not a bigot, the fact that there were some people already living in Palestine when many of the Jews arrived would not seem significant.
> ...


lol  Now you feel the need to make up more lies to try to cover up your bigotry.  Your complaint was that there were Arabs there when the European Jews arrived in the early 20th, but realizing you had revealed your extreme bigotry, not you jump ahead fifty years to deflect attention from it.  

No one knows how many of the Arabs were driven out or how many left of their own accord or how many fled because they were in the path of the invading Arab armies and were caught in a crossfire, but after UN resolution 194 passed, Israel opened an agency to accept applications from Arabs who had left and now wanted to return, and while the Arabs wailed loudly about being refugees, not one of them filed an application because to do so, would be to recognize the authority of the Israeli government and that would get them labeled as collaborators and get them killed.  It was a tragedy for the Arabs, but one they brought on themselves, because they were as xenophobic as you seem to be and like you, the though of a Jew living next door to them drove them to violence and then to disaster.  Israel kept the office to accept applications to return from the refugees open into the mid 1970's but while the Arabs wailed and moaned about wanting to return, not one of them filed an application to do so.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > First it is a fence, and again you show you have no idea what you are arguing about.  Second, attacking the fence is an attack on Israel because the fence prevents Palestinian terrorists from attacking Israeli civilians.
> ...


Once again, you show how stupid and ignorant you are.  That's not Gaza but the barrier that separates Judea and Samaria from pre 1967 Israel, and while sections of that run through populated areas are concrete, 90% of it is a fence.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> lol  Now you feel the need to make up more lies to try to cover up your bigotry.  Your complaint was that there were Arabs there when the European Jews arrived in the early 20th, but realizing you had revealed your extreme bigotry, not you jump ahead fifty years to deflect attention from it.
> 
> No one knows how many of the Arabs were driven out or how many left of their own accord or how many fled because they were in the path of the invading Arab armies and were caught in a crossfire, but after UN resolution 194 passed, Israel opened an agency to accept applications from Arabs who had left and now wanted to return, and while the Arabs wailed loudly about being refugees, not one of them filed an application because to do so, would be to recognize the authority of the Israeli government and that would get them labeled as collaborators and get them killed.  It was a tragedy for the Arabs, but one they brought on themselves, because they were as xenophobic as you seem to be and like you, the though of a Jew living next door to them drove them to violence and then to disaster.  Israel kept the office to accept applications to return from the refugees open into the mid 1970's but while the Arabs wailed and moaned about wanting to return, not one of them filed an application to do so.


I wasn't "complaining" Arabs were already living there, I was stating a fact.  And stating that fact has nothing to do with bigotry.

And it is ridiculous to think that people living in their homes for generations, would leave those homes voluntarily.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 3, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Once again, you show how stupid and ignorant you are.  That's not Gaza but the barrier that separates Judea and Samaria from pre 1967 Israel, and while sections of that run through populated areas are concrete, 90% of it is a fence.


I don't care if its a line drawn with spray paint, Israel has no jurisdiction on the Gazan side of the fence.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 3, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > lol  Now you feel the need to make up more lies to try to cover up your bigotry.  Your complaint was that there were Arabs there when the European Jews arrived in the early 20th, but realizing you had revealed your extreme bigotry, not you jump ahead fifty years to deflect attention from it.
> ...


You have clearly not been in a war zone, ever.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, you show how stupid and ignorant you are.  That's not Gaza but the barrier that separates Judea and Samaria from pre 1967 Israel, and while sections of that run through populated areas are concrete, 90% of it is a fence.
> ...


Israel does have the right to defend its border, which is what the fence is, from anyone trying to invade the country - which is what the Arabs have been trying to do for the past 5 weeks.






IDF footage showing a group of five Palestinian men damage and break through the Gaza security fence, before one of them is shot dead, during a protest in Bureij, in the central Gaza Strip, on April 3, 2018. (Screen capture)


I am sure that the USA has the right to protect its borders with Mexico or Canada, if non Americans try to come into the country for any reason, armed or not.  What do you say?

As long as the Arabs stayed "on their side of the fence" being peaceful, that would not be a problem.

So far, the problems have been:

Throwing rocks.

Throwing firebombs.

Allowing kites fly to the Israeli side while lit, so that when they land they will cause fires and damage

Arabs with guns attempting to cross over the fence in order to kidnap soldiers

Causing an environmental nightmare by setting on fire at least 10,000 rubber tires.
-----

And right in between the two Palestinian flags, is what the Arabs admire the most as an example of how to treat Jews:





Were you able to figure it out?


How do you like the peaceful protests so far?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > lol  Now you feel the need to make up more lies to try to cover up your bigotry.  Your complaint was that there were Arabs there when the European Jews arrived in the early 20th, but realizing you had revealed your extreme bigotry, not you jump ahead fifty years to deflect attention from it.
> ...


Yet another lie from you.  You complained that people were already living there as if you thought having a Jew move in your neighborhood  was a terrible thing.  There is nothing to any of your posts but bigotry.  Again and again you demonstrate how vast and profound you ignorance of the area and situation is and you you maintain strong opinions based on this ignorance.  The arrival of the European Jews did not displace the Arabs, but their violent response to the Jewish immigrants did lead to a war that did displace them.  Their problems are all self inflicted.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, you show how stupid and ignorant you are.  That's not Gaza but the barrier that separates Judea and Samaria from pre 1967 Israel, and while sections of that run through populated areas are concrete, 90% of it is a fence.
> ...


If you were not quite so stupid you might have said that in your opinion Israel should not have jurisdiction over the buffer zone, but clearly the fact on the ground is that Israel does have jurisdiction over it.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Israel need to protect its illegal settler colonial project.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


"This is not a peaceful protest."

It is not a peaceful occupation.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


It is your Palestinian mentality that the Saudi Prince is talking about.

That is why you understand nothing and continue to post nonsense.

Israel is a legal State.  And it has the papers to prove it, you like it or not.   It is made of the indigenous Jewish People/Nation which has lived on the land for 3800 years.

And many intelligent Muslims have and are acknowledging it, and speaking out loud.

Your childish outbursts is not going to change the wave, which is not going on the direction of Israel, in a positive way.

By all means, Israel is BY ALL MEANS necessary, like any other country .....going to protect its borders and its citizens and residents.

Get your pacifier out.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


If the Saudi Prince is so hot for the Palestinians to give their country to Israel, why doesn't he give his country to Israel?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Wow, what an absolutely DUMB response.

APPLAUSE  !!!!


----------



## Shusha (May 4, 2018)

The 'offer' that needs acceptance before we can begin to discuss details is the offer of a lasting and meaningful peace. That has never been accepted by the Arab Palestinians. 

Accepting the offer of peace would mean:

No more calling for return of Arab Palesintian descendants to Israel. 

No more antisemitic remarks by the leader of the Palestinian government. 

No more incitement to attack or breach international boundaries by the leader of the Palestinian government. No more calling for marching on Jerusalem ripping the hearts out of Jews along the way. 

No more denial of Jewish history. 

No more re-directing resources to violence against Israel. 

No more learned helplessness where the Arab Palestinians insist they can do nothing. Palestinians, first and formost have to accept that they are not helpless.


----------



## Shusha (May 4, 2018)

Let me clarify the 'helpless' part. They are completely and totally helpless to achieve a goal of destroying Israel. 

They are not in the least helpless in achieving a goal of friendly normative relations with all of their neighbors, including Israel.


----------



## Linkiloo (May 4, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


 I guess that makes it all fair then


----------



## admonit (May 4, 2018)

Shusha said:


> The 'offer' that needs acceptance before we can begin to discuss details is the offer of a lasting and meaningful peace. That has never been accepted by the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Accepting the offer of peace would mean:
> 
> ...


Actually you offer them just to change their mentality. OK. Good luck.


----------



## Hollie (May 4, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



What “country” does either of the competing Islamic terrorist franchises (Hamas or Fatah), have to give to anyone?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 4, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


 
Another stupid remark. Was that Olmert’s offer?  He was willing to give the Palestinians almost everything they asked for!
   Now the flip side; Why should Israel give in to all Palestinian demands knowing in time it could annex them to “ Palestine” and not being allowed access to their Holy Sites?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 4, 2018)

Shusha said:


> The 'offer' that needs acceptance before we can begin to discuss details is the offer of a lasting and meaningful peace. That has never been accepted by the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Accepting the offer of peace would mean:
> 
> ...


Hi m


Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > They don’t want 98 percent; they want 100 percent, “ Right of Return” which could in time make the Israelis the minority,and demanding they have control over a possible highway between Gaza and the W. Bank which is on Israeli territory , PLUS release of Palestinian prisoners. They are deliberately making demands they know Israel Is not going to agree to .
> ...


 
Exactly why there will be no “ Right of Return” Almost all of the West Bank, all of Gaza, their Capital in E. Jerusalem with the Israelis keeping control of just over 5 percent which would include their Holy Sites, plus some control inside the 67 Borders wasn’t enough?  Regarding your comment about a Toll Road between Gaza and the W. Bank the Palestinians are demanding total control of it. Legally, why are they entitled?  Holding those Prisoners who killed Israelis are against the law? FUCK YOU and FUCK THEM !!!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 4, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Let me clarify the 'helpless' part. They are completely and totally helpless to achieve a goal of destroying Israel.
> 
> They are not in the least helpless in achieving a goal of friendly normative relations with all of their neighbors, including Israel.



Their goal is to destroy Israel from the inside and what’s to stop Hamas from entering? One more reason for no “ Right of Return”


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> You have clearly not been in a war zone, ever.


In a war zone, people are driven from their homes, they don't leave voluntarily or because someone asks them to.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > You have clearly not been in a war zone, ever.
> ...


I will say it again, 

YOU KNOW NOTHING  about war zones.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

A Palestinian man is interviewed on the official Palestinian Authority television station. He shows a picture of himself as a young man, taken in June 1948 in front of his house. He says that the Arab radio stations repetitively kept telling the Palestinians to leave the frontline for at most two weeks, and then the Arab regimes will bring the Palestinians back to Ein-Kerem, near Jerusalem. The man says they thought two weeks was too long of a time, and now 50 years have gone by. PA TV (Fatah), July 7, 2009.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

A Palestinian refugee on official Palestinian Authority television openly ‎contradicts the Palestinian narrative on refugees, which usually places full ‎blame on Israel for Palestinian refugees. In this clip, Sadek Musid states that ‎Arab leaders encouraged Palestinians to leave their homes, promising them ‎that they would return within a week or two. 

‎ Transcript:‎
 Arab refugee Sadek Mufid: ”We headed first from Dir al-Qasi [northern Israel] ‎to Rmaich [Lebanon], considering what they (Arab leaders) said at the time: ‎‎“By Allah, in a week or two, you will return to Palestine.” The Arab armies ‎entered Palestine, along with the Arab Liberation Army. We left – we and ‎those who fled with us – and we all headed for Lebanon. Some people came ‎to Rmaich and others came to the villages on the border, such as Ein Ibl and ‎also to Bint Jbeil. People scattered. And we have about 11 or 15 [refugee] ‎camps in Lebanon.”‎ ‎[Official Palestinian Authority TV, Feb. 9, 2010]‎


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

This short film compiles video footage from Arab refugees and their accounts of events that today have been grossly distorted surrounding incidents such as Dier Yassin and the factors that gave birth to the Palestinian refugee problem in 1948.

 Anti-Israel activists seek to perpetuate lies in order to fault Israel entirely and claim that Israel has and always had plans to wipe out or expel the Arab population.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Israel does have the right to defend its border, which is what the fence is, from anyone trying to invade the country - which is what the Arabs have been trying to do for the past 5 weeks.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Looking at your first picture...







...if your so-called security fence is to the right of those men, then they are still in Gaza.  And if that is the fence you say is damaged, where's the damage?

As for the protesters, where's your link saying they are attacking Israel?  Because all the news reports I'm seeing on the internet and on TV, say they are peaceful and un-armed. 

You fuckers lie so much, I'm going to need some corroborating evidence to believe you.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Israel does have the right to defend its border, which is what the fence is, from anyone trying to invade the country - which is what the Arabs have been trying to do for the past 5 weeks.
> ...


You are in the wrong thread.

AGAIN


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Yet another lie from you.  You complained that people were already living there as if you thought having a Jew move in your neighborhood  was a terrible thing.  There is nothing to any of your posts but bigotry.  Again and again you demonstrate how vast and profound you ignorance of the area and situation is and you you maintain strong opinions based on this ignorance.  The arrival of the European Jews did not displace the Arabs, but their violent response to the Jewish immigrants did lead to a war that did displace them.  Their problems are all self inflicted.


Alright asshole, do you know who Ahad Ha'am was?  Would you call him a bigot?  Now, regarding your comment about the "violent response to the Jewish immigrants", I do give you credit for saying it was a "response" by the Arabs.  And what were they responding to?  As the famous _*Zionist Humanist*_ said...

_"... Ahad Ha'am warned that the settlers must under no circumstances arouse the wrath of the natives ... 'Yet what do our brethren do in Palestine? Just the very opposite! Serfs they were in the lands of the Diaspora and suddenly they find themselves in unrestricted freedom and this change has awakened in them an inclination to despotism. *They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause and even boast of these deeds;* and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination ...'
_​_"They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty"_

Those are the words of a Zionist living there at the time.  Now call him a BIGOT!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> You are in the wrong thread.
> 
> AGAIN


I specifically responded to YOUR post.  So if I'm in the wrong thread, so are you.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> If you were not quite so stupid you might have said that in your opinion Israel should not have jurisdiction over the buffer zone, but clearly the fact on the ground is that Israel does have jurisdiction over it.


That might be the reality, but it is in violation of international law. Even the ICC has said so.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

[  second Partition, in 1947, rejected by the Arab League ]

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpi/palestine/ch2.pdf


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> It is your Palestinian mentality that the Saudi Prince is talking about.
> 
> That is why you understand nothing and continue to post nonsense.
> 
> ...


That Saudi prince is a piece of shit and a little western kiss-ass!

There have been more Arabs living in that area than Jewish residents.  Arabs owned the majority of the land before the Zionist migration.  Israel is not made up of indigenous Jews.  In fact, the entire notion of the Jewish State violates the Three Oaths.  According to the Three Oaths, Jews are to remain in exile until God comes back down to earth to create Israel, but Zionists couldn't wait.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

In accounts of the July 2000 Camp David summit and the following months of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, we often hear about Ehud Barak's unprecedented offer and Yasser Arafat's uncompromising "no". Israel is said to have made a historic proposal, which the Palestinians, once again seizing the opportunity to miss an opportunity, turned down. The failure to reach a final agreement is attributed, without notable dissent, to Yasser Arafat.

(full article online)

Camp David: a tragedy of errors


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

Palestinians Rejected Statehood Three Times, Claim Frustration — with Israel | CAMERA


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Exactly why there will be no “ Right of Return” Almost all of the West Bank, all of Gaza, their Capital in E. Jerusalem with the Israelis keeping control of just over 5 percent which would include their Holy Sites, plus some control inside the 67 Borders wasn’t enough?  Regarding your comment about a Toll Road between Gaza and the W. Bank the Palestinians are demanding total control of it. Legally, why are they entitled?  Holding those Prisoners who killed Israelis are against the law? FUCK YOU and FUCK THEM !!!


I was going to launch into something, but I love the way you ended your post!  It reminds me of me.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > It is your Palestinian mentality that the Saudi Prince is talking about.
> ...


Thank you for reminding us that you are a religious nutcase.

Jews must wait until they are all killed around the world, for then.....

the world would go "Oops....we should have given them some of their land back"

Or Christian and Muslim preferred answer:

"Too Bad"

It is your kind of beliefs that the Jewish people are defending themselves from, and it is exactly what Israel is going to continue to defend itself from.

Am Israel Chai

The People of Israel Live


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> I will say it again,
> 
> YOU KNOW NOTHING  about war zones.


Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> You are in the wrong thread.
> 
> AGAIN


What am I wrong about?  Explain it.  In detail.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Thank you for reminding us that you are a religious nutcase.
> 
> Jews must wait until they are all killed around the world, for then.....
> 
> ...


Don't blame me because I quoted the Torah.  I'm a white Irish Catholic.  I don't give a shit about Judaism.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Thank you for reminding us that you are a religious nutcase.
> ...


Which is exactly why Jews have been persecuted by the "White Catholics" for 1700 years.

Because Catholics don't give a SHIT about humans.

Only about their own pathetic salvation.

Turraloo....


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> In accounts of the July 2000 Camp David summit and the following months of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, we often hear about Ehud Barak's unprecedented offer and Yasser Arafat's uncompromising "no". Israel is said to have made a historic proposal, which the Palestinians, once again seizing the opportunity to miss an opportunity, turned down. The failure to reach a final agreement is attributed, without notable dissent, to Yasser Arafat.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Camp David: a tragedy of errors


What was the clunker in that offer?


----------



## Hollie (May 4, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > In accounts of the July 2000 Camp David summit and the following months of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, we often hear about Ehud Barak's unprecedented offer and Yasser Arafat's uncompromising "no". Israel is said to have made a historic proposal, which the Palestinians, once again seizing the opportunity to miss an opportunity, turned down. The failure to reach a final agreement is attributed, without notable dissent, to Yasser Arafat.
> ...



Islam.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Yet another lie from you.  You complained that people were already living there as if you thought having a Jew move in your neighborhood  was a terrible thing.  There is nothing to any of your posts but bigotry.  Again and again you demonstrate how vast and profound you ignorance of the area and situation is and you you maintain strong opinions based on this ignorance.  The arrival of the European Jews did not displace the Arabs, but their violent response to the Jewish immigrants did lead to a war that did displace them.  Their problems are all self inflicted.
> ...


Since neither you nor I know what he was referring to, this means nothing.  You are clearly a bigot, and the  only good thing that can be said about you is that your need to try to deny shows you are ashamed of what you are.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > If you were not quite so stupid you might have said that in your opinion Israel should not have jurisdiction over the buffer zone, but clearly the fact on the ground is that Israel does have jurisdiction over it.
> ...


The reality is that the ICC never said such a thing and you are as always full of shit.


----------



## teddyearp (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> You're the fuckers who _moved_ here; they're the fuckers who _were_ here.



Where's here for you Billo? South Street in North Town?  LOL!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Which is exactly why Jews have been persecuted by the "White Catholics" for 1700 years.
> 
> Because Catholics don't give a SHIT about humans.
> 
> ...


What does that have to do with the Saudi prince?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Since neither you nor I know what he was referring to, this means nothing.  You are clearly a bigot, and the  only good thing that can be said about you is that your need to try to deny shows you are ashamed of what you are.


We know exactly who he was talking about.  The "settlers" he was referring to, were the migrating Zionists moving into Palestine.  The "natives" he was referring to, were the indigenous Palestinian-Arabs who had been living there for generations.

And you're a fuckin' liar!  Who the fuck do you think he was talking about, when he said _"They treat the *Arabs* with hostility and cruelty"? _
You know exactly who he was and you are too pussy to admit it.

Now if you fast forward to today, you and that Saudi prince are still treating them with hostility and cruelty; and you are most definitely boasting about it.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> The reality is that the ICC never said such a thing and you are as always full of shit.


Oh really?

*U.N. court rules West Bank barrier illegal

World court tells Israel to tear down illegal wall

10 years after the ICJ ruling, the illegal Separation Wall remains standing
*​Idiot!
*
*​


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

teddyearp said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > You're the fuckers who _moved_ here; they're the fuckers who _were_ here.
> ...


If you're talking about Long Beach, South Street is in North Town.  Unless you consider North Town, north of Artesia.  But no, I don't live there.  But I do live in Long Beach.  Or due to all the gang violence, we natives like to call it, Strong Beach.


----------



## member (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



 *"You are clearly a bigot."*

I dunno...[de'_ja_Vu] this 'calling someone a *bigot*' - it's big *red* flag ...  this *bigot* farce -- we're all folks who like living with their own kind, you can be a goand usually...the fingah-pointer [[you  ]] is the biggest fricken *bigot* of all...... _ca'mere_...how 'bout a hug..

*". . .and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination -- They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights."
*
normal people denounce inhumane brutality against ...everything.  people, animals, nature...

*"They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights."*

what about the bigger picture:  MUSLIMS/ARABS ...live better in israel than they do in "their own brethen's countries."


and...this: _*"deprive them of their rights, cruelty, hostility"*_:  it's as if you're talking about "THE ARAB WOMEN FOLK."  you know what i mean miss/mr.....?  [the hypocrisy of it all).


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

member said:


> *"You are clearly a bigot."*
> 
> I dunno...[de'_ja_Vu] this 'calling someone a *bigot*' - it's big *red* flag ...  this *bigot* farce -- we're all folks who like living with their own kind, you can be a goand usually...the fingah-pointer [[you  ]] is the biggest fricken *bigot* of all...... _ca'mere_...how 'bout a hug..
> 
> ...


Yeah, but what happens when normal people denounce Israel?  They get hit with a shit-storm of bullshit from people who think its okay to treat others like garbage.

And when they try that shit with me, I'm fine with it.  Because I know I'm a bigger asshole than they are.




member said:


> *"They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights."*
> 
> what about the bigger picture:  MUSLIMS/ARABS ...live better in israel than they do in "their own brethen's countries."


No they're not, they are treated as 2nd class citizens.  



member said:


> and...this: _*"deprive them of their rights, cruelty, hostility"*_:  it's as if you're talking about "THE ARAB WOMEN FOLK."  you know what i mean miss/mr.....?  [the hypocrisy of it all).


What's this "as if" bullshit?  We're not talking about "as if".  We're talking about Zionists moving into the area and treating the local residents like garbage.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Since neither you nor I know what he was referring to, this means nothing.  You are clearly a bigot, and the  only good thing that can be said about you is that your need to try to deny shows you are ashamed of what you are.
> ...


Again you demonstrate how stupid, ignorant and bigoted you are.  He wrote those words in 1891 while he was still living in Europe and didn't move to Israel until 1922, so when he wrote those words, he had no first hand knowledge of what was going on in Israel.  Were you not such a stupid, ignorant bigot you would have known this, but because you are a bigot, you have no interest in facts and are only interested in finding a Jew who was critical of other Jews.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > The reality is that the ICC never said such a thing and you are as always full of shit.
> ...


lol  How stupid can you be.  Your link is about the ICJ not the ICC.  Your ignorance is truly vast and profound.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

member said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


A bigot is some one who holds strong opinions that are not based on facts, his posts clearly demonstrate that his opinions are not based on facts, indeed, the show he has no interest in the facts, so calling him a bigot is properly descriptive.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Again you demonstrate how stupid, ignorant and bigoted you are.  He wrote those words in 1891 while he was still living in Europe and didn't move to Israel until 1922, so when he wrote those words, he had no first hand knowledge of what was going on in Israel.  Were you not such a stupid, ignorant bigot you would have known this, but because you are a bigot, you have no interest in facts and are only interested in finding a Jew who was critical of other Jews.


So you're saying Ahad Ha'am was full of shit?  What makes you think he didn't know what was going on in Palestine?  He's a Zionist.  He ought to know.  But you say he didn't.  Why?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> lol  How stupid can you be.  Your link is about the ICJ not the ICC.  Your ignorance is truly vast and profound.


So they changed their name from the Criminal Court, to the Criminal Court of Justice.  Big deal.  It's the same organization.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 4, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> A bigot is some one who holds strong opinions that are not based on facts, his posts clearly demonstrate that his opinions are not based on facts, indeed, the show he has no interest in the facts, so calling him a bigot is properly descriptive.


Aside from the links I provide, there are no facts.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Again you demonstrate how stupid, ignorant and bigoted you are.  He wrote those words in 1891 while he was still living in Europe and didn't move to Israel until 1922, so when he wrote those words, he had no first hand knowledge of what was going on in Israel.  Were you not such a stupid, ignorant bigot you would have known this, but because you are a bigot, you have no interest in facts and are only interested in finding a Jew who was critical of other Jews.
> ...


He wrote the words in 1891 and didn't move to Israel until 1922, so he had no first hand knowledge of what was going on.  Even some one as stupid as you ought to be able to understand that.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > lol  How stupid can you be.  Your link is about the ICJ not the ICC.  Your ignorance is truly vast and profound.
> ...


Again, you show a truly astonishing level of ignorance.  They are two different organizations.  I don't think I've even met anyone before quite as stupid and ignorant as you are.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 4, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > A bigot is some one who holds strong opinions that are not based on facts, his posts clearly demonstrate that his opinions are not based on facts, indeed, the show he has no interest in the facts, so calling him a bigot is properly descriptive.
> ...


Including the links you provide, you present no facts.  For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization.  On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel  and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> He wrote the words in 1891 and didn't move to Israel until 1922, so he had no first hand knowledge of what was going on.  Even some one as stupid as you ought to be able to understand that.


Maybe he visited there?  Maybe he received letters from other Zionists boasting about treating the Pals like garbage?  You said you didn't know what he was talking about.  Now you act like you know everything about him.  I have a hard time believing anything you say.

Let's be clear, you are officially saying Ahad Ha'am is full of shit?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > He wrote the words in 1891 and didn't move to Israel until 1922, so he had no first hand knowledge of what was going on.  Even some one as stupid as you ought to be able to understand that.
> ...


That's because you are just a dim witted bigot who was interested only in finding a jew who was critical of other Jews, but after your first post on the subject, I researched him on the internet and learned that the quote you cited was written in 1891 and he didn't move to Israel until 1922.  It would never have occurred to you to learn about him because you wouldn't want to come come across any facts that wouldn't support your completely irrational hostility toward Israel.  Even now, if you really doubted my statement you could have googled him and found out if I was correct, but for a bigot like you, facts are the enemy.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Again, you show a truly astonishing level of ignorance.  They are two different organizations.  I don't think I've even met anyone before quite as stupid and ignorant as you are.


Okay, you're right, they are different courts.  And neither one has ruled the wall legal.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Including the links you provide, you present no facts.  For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization.  On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel  and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.


The links are the facts.  The wall was ruled illegal.  And all you can do, is attack people you disagree with.


----------



## RoccoR (May 5, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  Billo_Really, toomuchtime_, et al,

I think there is some confusion here.



Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > lol  How stupid can you be.  Your link is about the ICJ not the ICC.  Your ignorance is truly vast and profound.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

They ARE NOT the same organization, although while at SHAPE, I found many people outside the security services that had similar notions.

•  The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the *principal judicial organ of the UN*.
•  The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an independent judicial body and *is not part of the UN.*​
There is such an agreement as the "Relationship Agreement between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC)."  It is found as the Treaties Series Volume 2283, as Index # 1272, English Text beginning on page 195.

*Article 2. Principles*

1. The United Nations recognizes the Court as an independent permanent judicial institution which, in accordance with articles I and 4 of the Statute, has international legal personality and such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfillment of its purposes.

2. The Court recognizes the responsibilities of the United Nations under the Charter.

3. The United Nations and the Court respect each other's status and mandate.​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Slyhunter (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Again, you show a truly astonishing level of ignorance.  They are two different organizations.  I don't think I've even met anyone before quite as stupid and ignorant as you are.
> ...





Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Including the links you provide, you present no facts.  For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization.  On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel  and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.
> ...


----------



## Slyhunter (May 5, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  Billo_Really, toomuchtime_, et al,
> 
> I think there is some confusion here.
> ...


Fuck any group that is majority Muslim.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> That's because you are just a dim witted bigot who was interested only in finding a jew who was critical of other Jews, but after your first post on the subject, I researched him on the internet and learned that the quote you cited was written in 1891 and he didn't move to Israel until 1922.  It would never have occurred to you to learn about him because you wouldn't want to come come across any facts that wouldn't support your completely irrational hostility toward Israel.  Even now, if you really doubted my statement you could have googled him and found out if I was correct, but for a bigot like you, facts are the enemy.


I'm not going to do your own homework for you, you lazy pussy.  You make the claim, you back it up.  And you don't know a flying fuck what I am interested in.  You're just a piece of shit asshole, who's too pussy to face reality on its own terms.  That's why you constantly attack others.  

You and that Prince are two peas in a pod.  You both walk around like your shit don't stink and you both think you can do whatever the fuck you please.  I'd like to see you say, the shit you say, in a bar face-to-face.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > That's because you are just a dim witted bigot who was interested only in finding a jew who was critical of other Jews, but after your first post on the subject, I researched him on the internet and learned that the quote you cited was written in 1891 and he didn't move to Israel until 1922.  It would never have occurred to you to learn about him because you wouldn't want to come come across any facts that wouldn't support your completely irrational hostility toward Israel.  Even now, if you really doubted my statement you could have googled him and found out if I was correct, but for a bigot like you, facts are the enemy.
> ...


typical liberal can't win with words threaten violence to shut your opponent up.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  Billo_Really, toomuchtime_, et al,
> 
> I think there is some confusion here.
> ...


I just admitted that.  You need to control your bitch!  You need to check your boy!

Now that I think about it, maybe you just did.  I take back what I said.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


>


That's right.  And I'm man enough to admit it.  How many posters around here would do that?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> Fuck any group that is majority Muslim.


Is your real name Stephan Miller?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> typical liberal can't win with words threaten violence to shut your opponent up.


I won with words and I didn't threaten violence.  Not everything ends with people throwing down.  I was merely making the point that the things he says here, he wouldn't say to someone face-to-face.


----------



## Markle (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> What the Pals want is simple, they want freedom. They want an end to the illegal and immoral occupation of Palestinian land by the Israeli's. They want Israel to respect international law and human rights. Human rights, that's something MBS and his Saudi bitches, don't respect.
> 
> The Palestinians have bent over backwards trying to appease Israel and all they've gotten in return, is more suffering.



Appease?  Is that what you call suicide bombers and rockets?

President Bill Clinton negotiated an agreement between Israel and Yassar Arafat which would have given Palestine 95% of their demands.  Arafat walked away.  Why?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Including the links you provide, you present no facts.  For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization.  On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel  and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.
> ...


It's not a question of disagreeing, you simply have not posted one honest word in this exchange.  No ruling was issued by the ICJ or ICC on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.  The advisory opinion you are referring to was about the barrier between pre 1967 and Judea and Samaria.  The Gaza fence and buffer zone are nowhere near the barrier the ICJ was talking about.  Again, you show yourself to be so ignorant tha if you had any personal integrity, you would acknowledge you do not know enough to hold any opinion at all.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > That's because you are just a dim witted bigot who was interested only in finding a jew who was critical of other Jews, but after your first post on the subject, I researched him on the internet and learned that the quote you cited was written in 1891 and he didn't move to Israel until 1922.  It would never have occurred to you to learn about him because you wouldn't want to come come across any facts that wouldn't support your completely irrational hostility toward Israel.  Even now, if you really doubted my statement you could have googled him and found out if I was correct, but for a bigot like you, facts are the enemy.
> ...


I don't constantly attack others, just ignorant bigots like you.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...


lol  You just admitted what?  You just said the ICJ is the same organization as the ICC.


----------



## RoccoR (May 5, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really,  et al,

Again, you are confused.  Unlike a Judgment, Advisory opinions are not necessarily the last word.



Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Including the links you provide, you present no facts.  For example, you claim the ICC ruled that the buffer zone is not under Israeli jurisdiction and then provide a link that the ICJ made such a ruling and then lie and claim the ICJ and the ICC are the same organization.  On top of that you demonstrate how utterly ignorant you are of the all the facts, since the ICJ made no such ruling but offered an advisory opinion on the barrier between Judea and Samaria and pre 1967 Israel  and not on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

There are three things you need to know when you are talking about the Advisory Opinion:

* Are decisions of the Court binding? *

Judgments delivered by the Court (or by one of its Chambers) in disputes between States are binding upon the parties concerned. Article 94 of the United Nations Charter lays down that "each Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of [the Court] in any case to which it is a party".

Judgments are final and without appeal. If either of the parties challenges their scope or meaning, it has the option to request an interpretation. In the event of the discovery of a fact hitherto unknown to the Court which might be a decisive factor, either party may apply for revision of the judgment.

As regards advisory opinions, it is usually for the United Nations organs and specialized agencies requesting them to give effect to them or not by whatever means are appropriate for them.​
EXCERPT from EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

7. The request does not ask or require the ICJ to pronounce itself on Israel/Palestine boundaries. In order to answer the question the ICJ needs only to take account of the fact that the Wall is being built by Israel in the OPT, including in and around East Jerusalem, beyond the Armistice Line of 1949 (the “Green Line”). The essential facts are simple: wherever the precise boundaries of the OPT lie, there is no doubt that the greater part of the Wall has been built by Israel well inside occupied Palestinian territory. The facts upon which the ICJ can rely in responding to the Request are of public record and are well-documented, including in United Nations reports.​

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Slyhunter (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > typical liberal can't win with words threaten violence to shut your opponent up.
> ...


Last time I said something, in a public forum online, anti-muslim someone went to my boss about it and got me fired for it. I live in a right to work state, can't sue em for doing it.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Markle said:


> Appease?  Is that what you call suicide bombers and rockets?
> 
> President Bill Clinton negotiated an agreement between Israel and Yassar Arafat which would have given Palestine 95% of their demands.  Arafat walked away.  Why?


Because it wasn't a fair agreement.

You need to realize, the bombers and rockets are in response to Israeli aggression.  They are defending themselves with the only things they have.  Israel is the most militarized country on earth and is constantly launching missiles, drone strikes and shooting at everything that moves.  Yet you never talk about that.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


The buffer zone is territory in Gaza controlled by Israel after they lied about leaving.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> It's not a question of disagreeing, you simply have not posted one honest word in this exchange.  No ruling was issued by the ICJ or ICC on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.  The advisory opinion you are referring to was about the barrier between pre 1967 and Judea and Samaria.  The Gaza fence and buffer zone are nowhere near the barrier the ICJ was talking about.  Again, you show yourself to be so ignorant tha if you had any personal integrity, you would acknowledge you do not know enough to hold any opinion at all.


It was a ruling and it was issued.  You're just too pussy to admit it.  Furthermore, 85% of that illegal Iron Curtain, is in the West Bank, which is land Israel DOES NOT OWN!

What would you do if someone tried to build a fence on your front lawn?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> I don't constantly attack others, just ignorant bigots like you.


You don't even have the balls to stand behind the things you say!  Of coarse you attack others, you have reality issues.  How can anyone possibly make a deal under these conditions?  There is no negotiating with fuckheads like you.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> lol  You just admitted what?  You just said the ICJ is the same organization as the ICC.


You're one post behind, Mr. Cherrypicker.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ Billo_Really,  et al,
> 
> Again, you are confused.  Unlike a Judgment, Advisory opinions are not necessarily the last word.
> ...


Whether you call it a ruling, or an advisory opinion, it means the same thing.     The wall is illegal according to international law.  You cannot build structures on someone else's property, without their permission.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> Last time I said something, in a public forum online, anti-muslim someone went to my boss about it and got me fired for it. I live in a right to work state, can't sue em for doing it.


I'm sorry that happened.  That "anti-muslim someone", is a piece of shit and should have his ass kicked!  One reason I've never used the "report button" (nor put people on ignore), is because I believe people have a right to speak their mind.  Even if it is something I find disgusting, they still have a right to say it.  I would never censor anyone.  That includes Zionists and Neocons.


----------



## Shusha (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...




Your argument is built on the premise that there is an existing international border which demarcates Israel from Arab Palestine. There is not. The border is under dispute and has never been settled between the parties involved. Your premise is incorrect and your argument has no validity. 

Unless you want to argue for the Oslo Accords in which case Israel builds only on land which, by mutual agreement, is under her control.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Your argument is built on the premise that there is an existing international border which demarcates Israel from Arab Palestine. There is not. The border is under dispute and has never been settled between the parties involved. Your premise is incorrect and your argument has no validity.
> 
> Unless you want to argue for the Oslo Accords in which case Israel builds only on land which, by mutual agreement, is under her control.


The internationally recognized borders are the pre-1967 lines.  The Green Line.  Israel seized territory during the '67 war. One of those territories is the West Bank. Israel has no sovereign title to that land.  You cannot hold onto land seized in a war.  Period.  Saying you can, is the same as saying it was okay for Germany to annex Poland.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


I agree that there is no border there. That means it is the same place on both sides.The UN says it is Palestine.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> I agree that there is no border there. That means it is the same place on both sides.The UN says it is Palestine.


Here's a deal the Saudi prince didn't make...

...how 'bout Trump giving Netanfuckyou Wisconsin?  Israel can move their entire country there and it could be known as The Jewish State of Wisconsin.  We can't give them Utah, because the Mormons already got that one.


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Link?


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > I agree that there is no border there. That means it is the same place on both sides.The UN says it is Palestine.
> ...



Why would the Israelis move? Just to placate your Jew hatreds?

Grab a tire and some kite string. Give your life some purpose.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Why would the Israelis move? Just to placate your Jew hatreds?
> 
> Grab a tire and some kite string. Give your life some purpose.


Troll woman and her drive by off topic attacks.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Where does Israel get its "right" to shoot Palestinians on Gaza land?


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



When Islamic terrorists wage attacks from Islamic terrorist’istan. 

Simple enough even for you?


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Why would the Israelis move? Just to placate your Jew hatreds?
> ...



You just didn’t like the response to your pointless babbling.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Ooooo, you played the terrorist card.

Good girl.


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Your usual retreat to cartoons when you're befuddled.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > I agree that there is no border there. That means it is the same place on both sides.The UN says it is Palestine.
> ...


The Jews homeland is Israel. The Jews ancient historical crap is in Israel, not Wisconsin.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 5, 2018)

There was never a State of Palestine until after Israel was created and then it was only created to counter Israel. Once Israel is gone so will the state of Palestine vanish and the lands will go back to Jordan and Egypt.


----------



## Shusha (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Your argument is built on the premise that there is an existing international border which demarcates Israel from Arab Palestine. There is not. The border is under dispute and has never been settled between the parties involved. Your premise is incorrect and your argument has no validity.
> ...



On the contrary the international recognition is and always has been that final borders will be negotiated in a final peace treaty. There is no cause in international law or recognition to claim that a border already exists and that therefore a particular piece of land is or is not part of "Palestine".


----------



## Shusha (May 5, 2018)

Which is exactly why the Arab Palestinians should accept a deal. Because it will recognize their sovereignty over a specifically defined territory. A recognition which they do not have now.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Hollie said:


> You just didn’t like the response to your pointless babbling.


More off topic troll-speak.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> The Jews homeland is Israel. The Jews ancient historical crap is in Israel, not Wisconsin.


The Palestinians are the direct descendants of the Israelites.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Shusha said:


> On the contrary the international recognition is and always has been that final borders will be negotiated in a final peace treaty. There is no cause in international law or recognition to claim that a border already exists and that therefore a particular piece of land is or is not part of "Palestine".


UN Resolution 242 tells Israel to get off that land.  International law also states, you cannot hold onto land seized in a war.  There is nothing to negotiate.  All Israel needs to do, is stop breaking the law.

If someone robs a bank, the cops don't negotiate with the robber, a deal that would allow him to keep part of the money.  

Your position is absurd!  And not a single country on the planet agrees with you.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > The Jews homeland is Israel. The Jews ancient historical crap is in Israel, not Wisconsin.
> ...


Now we really know that you are off your rockers.

(Wait..... we knew that even before this latest post )


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > On the contrary the international recognition is and always has been that final borders will be negotiated in a final peace treaty. There is no cause in international law or recognition to claim that a border already exists and that therefore a particular piece of land is or is not part of "Palestine".
> ...


More from your dream world.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Now we really know that you are off your rockers.
> 
> (Wait..... we knew that even before this latest post )


And there never was a diaspora.

How do you like that deal?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> More from your dream world.


Listen junior, if you're this vapid with the relevant facts, maybe you should withdraw from this discussion  until you have done your homework and are aware of what is in 242 and the UN Charter?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > On the contrary the international recognition is and always has been that final borders will be negotiated in a final peace treaty. There is no cause in international law or recognition to claim that a border already exists and that therefore a particular piece of land is or is not part of "Palestine".
> ...


Don't forget the land illegally taken by war in 1948.


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Don’t forget the land invaded by Arabs-Moslems who crossed the frontier and were driven back.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


Irrelevant.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Don't forget the land illegally taken by war in 1948.


You mean this land?


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



No. It's an uncomfortable fact that you’re unable and unwilling to address because your Islamist agenda is on the defensive. 

1948 was just the first time Arabs-Moslems attempted to further their goal of destroying Israel. Why don’t you lecture us with some Koran verses?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


What does that have to do with the land taken in 1948?


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Was land taken after the Arab-Islamist invasion?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Doesn't matter. None of those countries won or lost any land.


----------



## Shusha (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > On the contrary the international recognition is and always has been that final borders will be negotiated in a final peace treaty. There is no cause in international law or recognition to claim that a border already exists and that therefore a particular piece of land is or is not part of "Palestine".
> ...




Um. Have you read 242?  Where does it delineate an international border between Israel and "Palestine?" (It doesn't).

What it discusses is the relationship between the states in the dispute. Those states were Israel, Jordan and Egypt. The dispute between those states has been resolved in its entirety.

The Arab Palestinians, seeking independence and sovereignty, were not a Party to that resolution in that time. (Though I certainly do not dispute their current claims).

On the contrary, every country in the world agrees with me that the border between Israel and a future Palestine is a matter to be solved only through negotiation. Hence the entire idea of a peace process.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Neither Jordan, nor Egypt won any land in 1948?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You don't say?
You have no idea what happened with some of the Mandate of Palestine in 1948?  None at all?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


I know that contrary to popular bullshit, nobody won or lost the 1948 war.


----------



## Shusha (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...




Lol. Here's a hint.  Some people HAVE a sovereign nation. And some people don't. Now we might have different definitions of 'win' but .... shrug.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


This is what I answered to, and you did not understand what we are talking about

<<Doesn't matter. None of those countries won or lost any land.>>

We are talking about Countries.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Indeed.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


The "Country of Palestine" neither won, nor lost any land.  Because it does not exist, yet.
Jordan and Egypt won land in 1948.
Jordan and Egypt lost land in 1967.

Had the Palestinians accepted any of the offers I posted about, they would have one now.  They would be a country.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...




Yawn....  Here we go again.,   The claim that Israel does not have the Right to Exist.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...





Sixties Fan said:


> The "Country of Palestine" neither won, nor lost any land. Because it does not exist, yet.



Who says? Link?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You seem to be the only one who does not know that.

Go and look up the "Country" of Palestine before WWI yourself.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


*Decisions of international and national tribunals*
The U.S. State Department _Digest of International Law_ says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its _Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions_, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Oh, yeah..... the Treaty you just don't understand.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



 Sorry; Israel Won, the Arabs lost !


----------



## Hollie (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Oh my. Yet another thread with Tinmore screeching about the Treaty of Lausanne inventing his mythical “country of Pally’land”.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Israeli bullshit.

Link.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


The Mandate was merely an administration. It left.


----------



## rylah (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



bin Salman enters.
Arabs already tried to cede the land to a King from Mecca in 1919, I'm just saying don't whine when You get what You initially demanded, and that a king from Mecca is going to behave like he has a mandate on You...

P F Tinmore
Just saying there's historic justice in the irony.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


So I should believe an internet troll over all those posted above? *Not!*


----------



## rylah (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



*Believe *is the main word here.
I would say even religious about it.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Still no links, huh?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


There are no links to what does not exist, except in your Christian mind.

You do not like the Jews being sovereign of any of their ancient land.

You do not like that the Arabs have failed again and again in destroying Israel and returning the Jews you the only role you think
they were born for.  Under Christian and Muslim feet.

It is none of Israel's business, and none of any Jew's business either, that your preferred world is one where Jews have no power at all.

The Balfour Declaration changed that.

The Mandate for Palestine changed that, as well

Israel's Declaration of Independence solidified it.

Israel grows stronger because of haters like you.

Am Israel Chai.


----------



## rylah (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



To what dude?

You seem to end up chasing the same tail in every thread.
Forgetting that there's a real world going around You.

*Abd al-Hamid (manager of Saudi research center):*


"We're to recognize that Jerusalem is a religious symbol of the Jews, and it is sacred to them as Mecca and Medina to Muslims.
Therefore the Arab attitude must free itself from the idea that passed from generation to generation in Christianity and the Political Islam within its 2 streams - Sunni and Shia - an idea that was installed for solely political needs: culture of hatred of Jews and denial of their historic rights in the region.

When we need to argue with the Israeli side in negotiations..."

Interviewer: "Are You saying Palestinians should forget about a capital in East Jerusalem?"

Abd al-Hamid: "I meant that Palestinians, the Arabs and the Arab community, when they managing a negotiation with the Israelis,* they must accept the fact, which source is in sacred writings and history of the place: Jews are a part of this region and its history. And the State of Israel is a result of this historic right of the Jews in the region. When we manage the negotiation with this understanding, that the Israeli side is a partner to the history of this region, whether from rulers perspective, the peoples or the cultural aspects this will ease a lot and enable flexibility in order to reach peace*."


----------



## Billo_Really (May 5, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Um. Have you read 242?  Where does it delineate an international border between Israel and "Palestine?" (It doesn't).
> 
> What it discusses is the relationship between the states in the dispute. Those states were Israel, Jordan and Egypt. The dispute between those states has been resolved in its entirety.
> 
> ...


242 is very clear.  It tells Israel they have to give up the land they took in war.  They know what land they took, well, get the fuck off it!  You're not going to keep any of it.  You can spin this until the cows come home, in the end, you WILL be off that land.

The world didn't allow Hitler to keep Poland and its not going to allow you to annex the West Bank.

So you say every country agrees with you?  I'll make it easy on ya.  Name one country, just one, that has come out and publicly stated Israel's right to that land.  Just one.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Um. Have you read 242?  Where does it delineate an international border between Israel and "Palestine?" (It doesn't).
> ...



Another stupid ASSHOLE comment. Hitler INITIATED the War. That is the difference . Get. It? Of course not!!  “ International Law” is a joke, like YOU!
   Please tell us why Egypt blocked the Straits of Tiran, Israel appealed to the U.N. and they did Nothing!
  Better yet, tell us why the U.N. left just before the 67 War broke out . If the Arabs had won, does anyone in their right mind believe that land would have been given back?  He stated his goal was the destruction of Israel. He also stated  that with “ Right of Return” Israel will cease to co exist. FUCK YOU and the U. N!!!!!    What you think ???


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


Israel did leave, unfortunately, and the Palestinian terrorists used trees and buildings in what is now the buffer zone to shoot and fire rockets into Israel, necessitating the creation of the buffer zone.  As always, the Palestinians create their own problems and then try to blame them on Israel.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > It's not a question of disagreeing, you simply have not posted one honest word in this exchange.  No ruling was issued by the ICJ or ICC on the Gaza fence or buffer zone.  The advisory opinion you are referring to was about the barrier between pre 1967 and Judea and Samaria.  The Gaza fence and buffer zone are nowhere near the barrier the ICJ was talking about.  Again, you show yourself to be so ignorant tha if you had any personal integrity, you would acknowledge you do not know enough to hold any opinion at all.
> ...


It was not a ruling, it was an advisory opinion and it was not about the Gaza fence or buffer zone, it was about the barrier along the "green line" far away from Gaza.  Why do you keep repeating these lies?


----------



## Shusha (May 5, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Um. Have you read 242?  Where does it delineate an international border between Israel and "Palestine?" (It doesn't).
> ...




242 is utterly and completely irrelevant today because the States who were Parties to the conflict have resolved the conflict and signed peace treaties which have the effect of law. 

There is no legal agreement which creates an international boundary between Israel and "Palestine". (Unless you want to talk Oslo). 

You can "spin this" til the cows come home but you will not find any document which creates an international boundary between Israel and "Palestine". 

Every county agrees that a peace process must occur to settle the problem.  The idea that no negotiations are neede because the conflict has already been resolved is absurd. No country agrees with this. (Not that international law is a popularity contest, btw)


----------



## Markle (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Where do Palestinians get the "right" to send, train and pay suicide bombers and launch rockets into Israel?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

Markle said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


The Palestinians have the right to resist occupation by all means necessary.

Look it up.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


In fact, there is nos such right.  You just like the Idea of killing Jews and you think everyone should have the right to kill some Jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


It appears you did not look it up.


----------



## Markle (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Why did terrorist Yasser Arafat walk away from the deal brokered by President Bill Clinton giving Palestine 95% of what they demanded?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


 
Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. In 2006 1247 Rockets and 48 Mortars  we’re fired into Israel.  They are not under any obligation to give up more land while being fired upon. Look it up.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 5, 2018)

Markle said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


 

For the same reason Abbas rejected Olmert’s plan


----------



## danielpalos (May 5, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...


Anyone want to, "sponsor" a Dey?  It seems, this is a delicate operation, concerning peace in Palestine.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


It appears you made it up.


----------



## skye (May 5, 2018)

I agree with the Saudi Prince

Palestinians should have taken the deals they were offered.

End of story.


----------



## Kondor3 (May 5, 2018)

This was Saudi Arabia's way of saying: "_Phukk the goddamned Palestinians... we've wasted enough time on them already._"


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 5, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


The Palestinian people were among the few peoples in the world that the United Nations had recognized as being entitled to use all means necessary to achieve their self-determination.

Human Rights Council adopts resolution calling for cessation of Israeli mlitary attacks in OPT and of firing of crude rockets - Human Rights Council 7th Session (6 March, pm session) - Press release (excerpts) (10 March 2008)


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 5, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



The UN Human Rights Council has no authority to bestow rights on anyone.  It's complete function is to produce propaganda statements, mostly about Israel, that no one pays attention to.  To the extent there is any international law, it is determined by the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute.  

All that said, the fact is, you're lying.  The resolution does not say the Palestinians are entitled to use all rights necessary to fight against Israel.  Even the clowns on the Human Rights Council are not that crazy.


----------



## rylah (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



No they don't.

But if You choose so - then it works both ways.
And if so - then Your team has whole countries under the rule of their families', don't forget for a moment that this is common knowledge in the middle east, even admitted by Hamas:

*Tribes of Arabia  Tamimi tribe*






"Hamas and PA leaders with al-Thani Tamimi Emir of Qatar"

The tribe of *Banu Tamim* (Arabic: بـنـو تـمـيـم‎) or *Bani Tamim* (Arabic: بـني تـمـيـم‎) is one of the main tribes of Arabia.

Today, descendants from the tribe live in the Arabian Peninsula and neighboring countries such as Saudi Arabia,[1][2] India, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Syria, Qatar, Oman, Yemen, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Iran, Lebanon and Palestine. The word _Tamim_ in Arabic means strong and solid. It can also mean perfection.[3]

*Dynasties[edit]*

The Aghlabid dynasty
The Al Thani, ruling family of Qatar. (See House of Thani)
The Al ash-Sheikh family of the Grand Muftis of the Emirate of Diriyah, then the Emirate of Najd and now modern day Saudi Arabia (Religious Dynasty).
Al Khater – a prestigious family of the middle east based primarily in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain

PA chief Abbas: Hamas leader Mashaal is a liar
Qatar coordinated payment of salaries with Israel, PA

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Again - Arabs initially tried to cede the land and control to an Emir from Arabia,
You have no reason to complain about it when it goes that way.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Another stupid ASSHOLE comment. Hitler INITIATED the War. That is the difference . Get. It? Of course not!!  “ International Law” is a joke, like YOU!
> Please tell us why Egypt blocked the Straits of Tiran, Israel appealed to the U.N. and they did Nothing!
> Better yet, tell us why the U.N. left just before the 67 War broke out . If the Arabs had won, does anyone in their right mind believe that land would have been given back?  He stated his goal was the destruction of Israel. He also stated  that with “ Right of Return” Israel will cease to co exist. FUCK YOU and the U. N!!!!!    What you think ???


Better read this answer fast.  Apparently, me responding to your post is derailing the thread.  

I wonder just how many fucking ways you can talk about a comment from a Saudi prince?  Get fucking real!

Your post is off topic as all hell, yet it remains.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Shusha said:


> 242 is utterly and completely irrelevant today because the States who were Parties to the conflict have resolved the conflict and signed peace treaties which have the effect of law.
> 
> There is no legal agreement which creates an international boundary between Israel and "Palestine". (Unless you want to talk Oslo).
> 
> ...


242 is irrelevant because you don't stand behind your word.  You don't care about international law.  You care about believing in the absurd.

There is no difference between Israel annexing the West Bank and Hitler annexing Poland.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Markle said:


> Where do Palestinians get the "right" to send, train and pay suicide bombers and launch rockets into Israel?


From the occupation.  A population under occupation, has the legal right to resist aggression from a foreign force.


----------



## Shusha (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > 242 is utterly and completely irrelevant today because the States who were Parties to the conflict have resolved the conflict and signed peace treaties which have the effect of law.
> ...




Don't be absurd. Of course there is a difference. Poland was an established State and had an international boundary with Germany.

Palestine has no international boundary with Israel. The boundary has yet to be determined through negotiation and a peace treaty.

That is one of the main points of a peace process. To establish the boundary.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Don't be absurd. Of course there is a difference. Poland was an established State and had an international boundary with Germany.
> 
> Palestine has no international boundary with Israel. The boundary has yet to be determined through negotiation and a peace treaty.
> 
> That is one of the main points of a peace process. To establish the boundary.


Those people have been living there for generations and they have rights.  You don't need a country with borders to have human rights.  Rights, BTW, Israel has taken away.

And of coarse it is like Germany and Poland.  You started a war with Egypt, who does have an international boundary.  Then you took land you have no sovereign title to.  And you never will.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > 242 is utterly and completely irrelevant today because the States who were Parties to the conflict have resolved the conflict and signed peace treaties which have the effect of law.
> ...



I’ll give you 4.5 / 5 for such weepy-eyed melodrama.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> I’ll give you 4.5 / 5 for such weepy-eyed melodrama.


Off topic.  You're derailing the thread.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Where do Palestinians get the "right" to send, train and pay suicide bombers and launch rockets into Israel?
> ...


While entertaining, your rambling tirades are, nevertheless, lacking any real coherency. 

Gaza is not occupied. Therefore, your silly “from the occupation” meme is meaningless. And yes, you can cut and paste the revised and altered definition for “occupation” that has been cut and pasted dozens of times but that’s really a lot of Islamic terrorist apologist scapegoating. 

Here’s the link to the Hamas charter:

The Avalon Project : Hamas Covenant 1988

Note that there is no mention of “occupation” anywhere in that documemt. What you will find is the charter is actually a statement of Islamic fascism and Islamist supremacy. What you will find is that the charter is a reiteration of Koranic slogans about Islamist entitlement, gee-had and appeals to Islamist politico-religious ideology.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I’ll give you 4.5 / 5 for such weepy-eyed melodrama.
> ...



Apparently, any response to your comments you don’t agree with is “derailing the thread”.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> While entertaining, your rambling tirades are, nevertheless, lacking any real coherency.
> 
> Gaza is not occupied. Therefore, your silly “from the occupation” meme is meaningless. And yes, you can cut and paste the revised and altered definition for “occupation” that has been cut and pasted dozens of times but that’s really a lot of Islamic terrorist apologist scapegoating.
> 
> ...


That's a 40 year old document they don't even follow any more.  Live in the now.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Apparently, any response to your comments you don’t agree with is “derailing the thread”.


The thread is not about me.  All your posts are.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > While entertaining, your rambling tirades are, nevertheless, lacking any real coherency.
> ...



That’s quite the islamo-tap dance you’re doing. 

Actions speak with the utmost clarity and the goals of the charter are being pursued today just as they were in 1988. 

Why not show us when and where Hamas has repudiated the charter?

Live in the now, not your alternate reality of Islamic terrorist apologetics.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently, any response to your comments you don’t agree with is “derailing the thread”.
> ...



More excuses for your lack of ability to form a coherent argument.


----------



## rylah (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > While entertaining, your rambling tirades are, nevertheless, lacking any real coherency.
> ...



_" they don't even follow any more." _







And the new "updated" document:







Q. Do You think sane Arab countries want to be associated with this lunacy?
Think about it... these suicidal maniacs are claiming to be the symbol of _Arab honor_...  
No one needs to explain what eventually happens to Arabs who dishonor  the family.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> More excuses for your lack of ability to form a coherent argument.


Again.  Another derailing post about me.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

rylah said:


> And he new "updated" document:


Where's the link to your photo shopped pictures?


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

There’s not a lot of whining about “occupation” from Islamist clerics. It’s more about insensate Jew hatreds, gee-had and Islamist fascism; attributes that have defined Islamism since it’s invention by Muhammud (swish).


MEMRI TV Clip No. 6543: Friday Sermon By Gaza Cleric Musa Abu Jleidan: The 'Return March' Goes Hand In Hand With Jihad By The Sword; The Jews Are The Philosophers Of Terrorism And Crime

MEMRI TV Clips Of Gaza 'Return March'

To view this clip on MEMRI TV, click here.

In a Friday sermon, Gaza cleric Sheikh Musa Abu Jleidan said that the "Great Return March" is a "form of Jihad" that "does not eliminate the need for Jihad by the sword, by missiles, and by rockets." "They go hand in hand," he said. Speaking at Masjid Al-Abrar, Rafah, on April 27, Sheikh Abu Jleidan further said that the Jews "are the philosophers of terrorism and crime, people of treachery and deceit, who slayed the prophets of Allah." The sermon was posted on Sheikh Abu Jleidan's YouTube channel.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > More excuses for your lack of ability to form a coherent argument.
> ...



Again, your retreat.


----------



## rylah (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > And he new "updated" document:
> ...



Read the post again.
 If bold denial is Your main retreat then You're already on the defense.
Because we both know Your retreat is ridiculous.

This is Beit Ummar...



Q. So how many Arab countries do You think want to be publicly associated with and fight for that flag as a symbol of_ 'Arab Muslim honor'_? 

I think it will be the Arab neighbors themselves who'll make the biggest impact on the situation. In the long run - that's more of an obstacle for them than for Israel.


----------



## Shusha (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Don't be absurd. Of course there is a difference. Poland was an established State and had an international boundary with Germany.
> ...



The Arab Palestinians have been there for generations and do have rights. Never have I disputed that. 

Their rights do not extend to unilaterally claiming an international border between themselves and another sovereign nation. International borders are created through treaties between the Parties concerned. 

Nor do their rights extend to the destruction of another sovereign nation. 

Israel has an ironclad legal claim to all of the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine (Jordan excepted).  Israel chooses not exercise her rights over her entire claim as a specific acknowledgement of Arab Palestinian rights to a territory of heir own. 

But Arab Palestinians don't seem capable of making a sovereign claim over their share because they are still too hung up on claiming the entire territory for themselves and ripping the hearts out of Jews.


----------



## member (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



 *"being entitled to use all means necessary to achieve their self-determination.
*
yes, *"self determination"**  . . .*to blowout their eyeballs.  palestinians will ALWAYS and forever be associated with TERRORISM -- cause....they ARE terrorists. also, terrorists being  "elected" as the palestinian peoples' Government.  [how pathetic is that?].  Ham*ASS*_*....*_


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


The Palestinians want all of Palestine?

Oh my!


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

member said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Oh jeese, more of Israrl's terrorist propaganda campaign.


----------



## Shusha (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...




The Arab Palestinians want all of Palestine and to exclude the Jewish Palestinians.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

[ This is what  the Arab Palestinians teach about  all of Israel.  They call Israel.....Palestine, and theirs  ]

Palestinian Authority TV documentary presents Israel's coastal cities as "Palestine"
------------------
Statue of map of “Palestine” in Fatah official’s office 
Source: Official Fatah Facebook page, Apr. 18, 2018





-------

Monument to “Martyrs” of the refugee camp in Qalandiya shaped like map of “Palestine” erasing Israel 
Source: Official Palestinian Authority TV, Apr. 11, 2018




--------------

Image on Fatah’s official Facebook page shows a group of people marching with a Palestinian flag toward a map of "Palestine" which replaces all of Israel 
Source: Fatah's Facebook page, Apr. 6, 2018






-----------------------

Yes, Palestinians want all of Palestine, which to them includes ALL of Israel.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Of course the Arabs-moslems want all of Pal'istan. That, despite the fact that Arabs-Moslems never owned all of the geographic area. They also want it purged of non-islamics. They believe the geographic area is a religious entitlement, an endowment or _waqf_, promised by the religions inventor. 

Fortunately, one small are of muhammedan'istan has enjoyed the benefits of a modern, educated society: Israel, which stands in rather stark contrast to the economic, social and cultural wasteland that exists where Islamism controls.


----------



## danielpalos (May 6, 2018)

Any "retiring field marshals" want to make a case for a Deylicate in Palestine?


----------



## RoccoR (May 6, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really,  et al,

I know many people believe that the ICJ said this.  But "illegal" _(prohibited)_ and "contrary to international law" _(holding an opposite position)_ are not quite the same thing. 



Billo_Really said:


> Whether you call it a ruling, or an advisory opinion, it means the same thing.     The wall is illegal according to international law.  You cannot build structures on someone else's property, without their permission.


*(COMMENT)*

The "opinion" is not a requirement on Israel to take some action.  Israel was NOT a party in a case before the court.

The court cannot pronounce the wall illegal, when the court did not rule on the were the boundaries are _(if any) _since the Armistice Lines were only in force until a treaty was put in place.

And, you simplified explanationsuggests a required permission.  There was on Arab Palestinian permission noted in the ICJ Opinion.  The Israeli occupation follwed the Jordanian Sovereignty _(in the case of the West Bank)_ and an Egyptian Military Governorship _(in the case of the Gaza Strip)_.   


*The request does not ask or require the ICJ to pronounce itself on Israel/Palestine boundaries.* In order to answer the question the ICJ needs only to take account of the fact that the Wall is being built by Israel in the OPT, including in and around East Jerusalem, beyond the Armistice Line of 1949 (the “Green Line”).​
You just blindly repeat something someonesaid without any personal understanding of what was said.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## member (May 6, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ Billo_Really,  et al,
> 
> I know many people believe that the ICJ said this.  But "illegal" _(prohibited)_ and "contrary to international law" _(holding an opposite position)_ are not quite the same thing.
> ...



LoL.

(You just *blindly repeat* something someone said without any personal understanding of what was said.)


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Again, your retreat.


And still another off topic, derailing post.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

rylah said:


> Read the post again.
> If bold denial is Your main retreat then You're already on the defense.
> Because we both know Your retreat is ridiculous.
> 
> ...


Arab neighbors are not occupying land that is not theirs.  Israel is.  The occupation needs to end.  That is the only "deal" on the table.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Shusha said:


> The Arab Palestinians have been there for generations and do have rights. Never have I disputed that.
> 
> Their rights do not extend to unilaterally claiming an international border between themselves and another sovereign nation. International borders are created through treaties between the Parties concerned.
> 
> ...


The Mandate did not give Israel the land they seized in the '67 war.  You cannot hold onto land seized in a war.  We didn't let Germany keep Poland and we're not going to let you keep the land you took in that war.

How clearer can I make this?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Of course the Arabs-moslems want all of Pal'istan. That, despite the fact that Arabs-Moslems never owned all of the geographic area. They also want it purged of non-islamics. They believe the geographic area is a religious entitlement, an endowment or _waqf_, promised by the religions inventor.
> 
> Fortunately, one small are of muhammedan'istan has enjoyed the benefits of a modern, educated society: Israel, which stands in rather stark contrast to the economic, social and cultural wasteland that exists where Islamism controls.


Wrong!


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Of course the Arabs-moslems want all of Pal'istan. That, despite the fact that Arabs-Moslems never owned all of the geographic area. They also want it purged of non-islamics. They believe the geographic area is a religious entitlement, an endowment or _waqf_, promised by the religions inventor.
> ...



No. It’s demonstrably true.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ Billo_Really,  et al,
> 
> I know many people believe that the ICJ said this.  But "illegal" _(prohibited)_ and "contrary to international law" _(holding an opposite position)_ are not quite the same thing.


Doing something contrary to international law, is doing something illegal.



RoccoR said:


> The "opinion" is not a requirement on Israel to take some action.  Israel was NOT a party in a case before the court.


Doesn't matter.  242 tells Israel to take action and Israel has refused to honor that.



RoccoR said:


> The court cannot pronounce the wall illegal, when the court did not rule on the were the boundaries are _(if any) _since the Armistice Lines were only in force until a treaty was put in place.


The court pronounced the wall illegal, because it collectively punishes the Palestinian population living around it.  And collective punishment is a crime against humanity.



RoccoR said:


> And, you simplified explanationsuggests a required permission.  There was on Arab Palestinian permission noted in the ICJ Opinion.  The Israeli occupation follwed the Jordanian Sovereignty _(in the case of the West Bank)_ and an Egyptian Military Governorship _(in the case of the Gaza Strip)_.


80% of the wall is built in the West Bank.  The West Bank is not Israeli property.  You cannot build a structure on someone else's property without their permission.  In addition, you cannot build a structure on property that is not yours.



RoccoR said:


> *The request does not ask or require the ICJ to pronounce itself on Israel/Palestine boundaries.* In order to answer the question the ICJ needs only to take account of the fact that the Wall is being built by Israel in the OPT, including in and around East Jerusalem, beyond the Armistice Line of 1949 (the “Green Line”).


It doesn't have to.



RoccoR said:


> You just blindly repeat something someonesaid without any personal understanding of what was said.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R


Go fuck yourself!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> No. It’s demonstrably true.


No it isn't.  They just want the occupation to end.  They just want freedom.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The Arab Palestinians have been there for generations and do have rights. Never have I disputed that.
> ...



 Germany initiated the War, you Asshole. That is the difference. How clearer can I make this?


----------



## Shusha (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> The Mandate did not give Israel the land they seized in the '67 war....



Um. Actually it did. The entire territory was mandated to be the NATIONal homeland for the Jewish people. Period. Full stop. There is no possible alternate interpretation of the relevant documentation and treaties. 

The conflict arising between 1948 and 1967 was a direct result of Jordan and Egypt invading territory which did not belong to them and crossing international boundaries between their territory and territory belonging to the State of Israel. Its the very no-no we are discussing.  Neither Jordan nor Egypt can win territory in war and they both, rightly, rescinded all claim to the territory when they signed peace treaties with Israel which demarcated the boundaries between their territory and Israel's. 

The 1967 conflict between Arab States and Israel is absolutely irrelevant to the current conflict between Israel and an arising Arab Palestinian population wishing self-determination and secession from Israel/Palestine.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


My friends,

Billo is a Catholic.  Irish.

He lives in a world where Jews are still and should forever be under Christian foot.

Jews do not deserve a Sovereign State because Jews do not deserve a home, ever.

The only things Jews deserve are the pogroms which led to the Inquisition, which led to more pogroms, which led to the Holocaust.

A few Jews being killed here and there, is not right for him.

The world HAS the right to attack Jews for the simple reason that Christianity has decided that they should not have a home.

Jews belong to Christians in Europe, Americans, Australia, etc

Jews belong to Muslims in the Arab conquered lands outside Arabia.

Jews, get used to it and give up the game of ever thinking that some day you can escape Christianity and Islam's decrees on you.

Jews belong not to themselves, ever.


A few Saudi Princes, and other Muslims and Christians is not ever going to change the world Billo and others will forever live in.

In other words,   DO NOT BOTHER with Billo.


There is nothing there.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > No. It’s demonstrably true.
> ...



Do yourself a favor and read the Hamas charter. You will notice the charter makes no mention of “occupation”.

It does, however, repeatedly cite Islamist religious proscriptions for Jew hatreds and fascist ideals of Islamist entitlement to lands conquered during gee-had.

It’s odd that people “who just want freedom” voted in the very dictators who oppress them.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


He could not care less.  He never will.  His words have said so many times.


----------



## Shusha (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > No. It’s demonstrably true.
> ...



They consider ANY Jewish presence or sovereignty to be "occupation". 

If they wanted freedom and self-determination and sovereignty they would have accepted one of the literally dozens of offers that have been on the table.

They haven't because the only end of occupation they will accept is the destruction of Israel.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Hamas must be furious. They spelled out in their Charter, in explicit detail, what their goals are. Yet, there are some people who still want to ignore what they wrote.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

[  But....but....they just want to be FREE......... No Palestinians mentioned, only Muslims, all Muslims, only Muslims ]


Strategies and Methods

*Strategies of the Islamic Resistance Movement: Palestine Is Islamic aqf:*

*Article Eleven:*
The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that.* Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day. *This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Moslem generations till Judgement Day?

*This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Moslems have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement. *

It happened like this: When the leaders of the Islamic armies conquered Syria and Iraq, they sent to the Caliph of the Moslems, Umar bin-el-Khatab, asking for his advice concerning the conquered land - whether they should divide it among the soldiers, or leave it for its owners, or what? After consultations and discussions between the Caliph of the Moslems, Omar bin-el-Khatab and companions of the Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, it was decided that the land should be left with its owners who could benefit by its fruit. As for the real ownership of the land and the land itself, it should be consecrated for Moslem generations till Judgement Day. Those who are on the land, are there only to benefit from its fruit. This Waqf remains as long as earth and heaven remain. Any procedure in contradiction to Islamic Sharia, where Palestine is concerned, is null and void.

"Verily, this is a certain truth. Wherefore praise the name of thy Lord, the great Allah." (The Inevitable - verse 95).

------------

[ Just one of the many article regarding MUSLIM  -  NOT PALESTINIAN - ownership of the land.

NOTHING about Arab, Muslim, Palestinians, being the indigenous people of the land.

The Quran is very clear as to who the land of Israel belongs to - who the indigenous/native people of that land are - The Jewish People.  The ones who had been there for over 3500 years  ]


----------



## Markle (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Oh jeese, more of Israrl's terrorist propaganda campaign.



Being a proud anti-Semite, please explain your theory of "Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign".


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Markle said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Oh jeese, more of Israrl's terrorist propaganda campaign.
> ...


You are a proud anti-Semite? I wouldn't have known.

Anyway, in everything you see, hear, or read out of Israel, they play the terrorist card.

A good example was during the 2006 war with Lebanon. Nutandyahoo was touring the rightwingnut radio circuit selling the war. He was on the Bill Bennett show. He played the terrorist card 17 times in an 8 minute segment like he was trying to sell something. This was radio but I could see Bennett nodding like a bobble head doll.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


LINK !!!!!


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



What’s wrong with referring to Islamic terrorists as Islamic terrorists?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


It was a transcript on Bill Nennett's web site.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


People defending their country are terrorists?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Arab Palestinians do NOT have a country.
They have refused one since 1937.

Still at it


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Link? Or are you just shoveling Israeli shit?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Well, since it does not seem to exist we are simply to accept your version of it.

Never mind what the Lebanon war was all about, right?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Which Lebanon war? Israel has been at war with all of its neighbors multiple times. I think there is a common denominator here.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Well, I cannot find any link to this radio show to be able to hear it and make up my mind about it.

BUT.....

Let me give you a quick review as to who or what started that war:

Instigated when Hezbollah guerrillas conducted a perfidious cross-border raid in which they killed eight Israel Defense Forces soldiers and abducted two others

Background & Overview: Second Lebanon War

------

Go ahead.....tell us that Israel did something to this non Palestinian people which got them so upset that they crossed into Israel, killed eight soldiers and abducted two others.

Be your guest.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


I did not use the word WHICH.

I said  WHAT.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Oh, that one. Israel was still holding Lebanese political prisoners from their occupation. Hezbollah needed someone to swap.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


How nice of them. 

Still, nothing to do with the Palestinians and their rejection of peace, which is what this thread is all about.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


The Palestinians do not reject peace. They just reject Israel's version of peace.


----------



## RoccoR (May 6, 2018)

Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  P F Tinmore, _et al,_

Oh yes, here we go again.  They are the poor downtrodden Arab Palestinians.  Being accused of terrorism when it was just when it was an Islamic prayer meeting.



P F Tinmore said:


> Oh jeese, more of Israrl's terrorist propaganda campaign.


*(REFERENCE)*

✪⇒  The international community has elaborated 19 international legal instruments to prevent terrorist acts.

1.  Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, done at The Hague on16 December 1970.

2.  Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation,
done at Montreal on 23 September 1971.

3.  Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 14 December 1973.

4.  International Convention against the Taking of Hostages, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 17 December 1979.

5.  Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, adopted at Vienna on 3 March 1980.

6. Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation, supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, done at Montreal on 24 February 1988.

7  .Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, done at Rome on 10 March 1988.

8.  Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms located on the Continental Shelf, done at Rome on 10 March 1988.​
9.  International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 15 December 1997.​
*(COMMENT)*

I want to get this straight in my mind.  What you are saying is that Arab Palestinians DO NOT HAVE a past history of the criminal behaviors listed here:

✪⇒  That the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) never engaged in unlawful activities such as illicit arms trafficking, drug dealing and racketeering, including the exploitation of persons for purposes of funding terrorist activities,

✪⇒  An act which constitutes an offense within the scope of and as defined in one of the treaties or conventions listed, but not limited to, in the references above.

✪⇒  Including the HoAP that commits an offence within the meaning of this International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings if that person unlawfully and intentionally delivers, places, discharges or detonates an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place of public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility.

✪⇒  That the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), individually or as part of an organization, never engaged to seize or detain and threaten to kill, to injure, or to continue to detain another person in order to compel a third party, namely, a State, an international intergovernmental organization, a natural or juridical person, or a group of persons, to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the hostage commits the offence of taking of hostage within the meaning of this Convention."

✪⇒  That the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) never engaged in the intentional murder, kidnapping or another attack upon the person or liberty of an internationally protected person, a violent attack upon the official premises, the private accommodations, or the means of transport of such person; a threat or attempt to commit such an attack; and an act "constituting participation as an accomplice".​
If you're having trouble finding examples, I can readily supply them to you.  There is no campaign by the Israeli's to falsely label Arab Palestinian activities as acts of either terrorism or violations of Customary and IHL.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> Oh yes, here we go again.  They are the poor downtrodden Arab Palestinians.  Being accused of terrorism when it was just when it was an Islamic prayer meeting.
> ...


Like a good propagandist, you don't mention any of Israel's crimes.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> 1. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, done at The Hague on16 December 1970.


OK, so the Palestinians hijacked some airplanes like 50 years ago.

What else you got?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, done at The Hague on16 December 1970.
> ...


He should have put it in terms you would be able to understand, the Palestinians are governed by gangsters, the PLO and Hamas, and  the people seem to like it that way.  By any reasonable measure, organized crime families have taken over both Gaza and the Palestinian areas in Judea and Samaria.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, done at The Hague on16 December 1970.
> ...



So why all the whining about Israel winning some land in a war started by Arabs-Moslems like 70 years ago?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


What war did the Palestinians start?


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Do you want a list of acts of war?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Sure. List Israel's too.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Germany initiated the War, you Asshole. That is the difference. How clearer can I make this?


So did Israel, asshole.  The war started when Israel rolled tanks into Egypt.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Um. Actually it did. The entire territory was mandated to be the NATIONal homeland for the Jewish people. Period. Full stop. There is no possible alternate interpretation of the relevant documentation and treaties.
> 
> The conflict arising between 1948 and 1967 was a direct result of Jordan and Egypt invading territory which did not belong to them and crossing international boundaries between their territory and territory belonging to the State of Israel. Its the very no-no we are discussing.  Neither Jordan nor Egypt can win territory in war and they both, rightly, rescinded all claim to the territory when they signed peace treaties with Israel which demarcated the boundaries between their territory and Israel's.
> 
> The 1967 conflict between Arab States and Israel is absolutely irrelevant to the current conflict between Israel and an arising Arab Palestinian population wishing self-determination and secession from Israel/Palestine.


Wrong!  The Mandate was based on the Balfour Declaration.  And that "declaration" had a caveat...

_...it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine..._​Zionists violated after they said they wouldn't.  And then, as British forces withdrew from the area, Zionist militias started taking more area than was allocated in the Mandate.

There is nothing to deal.  Get off land that isn't yours!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Hamas must be furious. They spelled out in their Charter, in explicit detail, what their goals are. Yet, there are some people who still want to ignore what they wrote.


That's all you got.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


 



P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



 You have it backwards ( as usual) The Israelis do not reject peace. They just reject the Palestinians version of “ peace” which would include giving up their Holy Sites.


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas must be furious. They spelled out in their Charter, in explicit detail, what their goals are. Yet, there are some people who still want to ignore what they wrote.
> ...



Not at all. I couldn't help but notice you shuffled off when your silly "they want just want freedom" comment was refuted by the text of the Hamas Charter.

In fact, the term "freedom" does not appear in the Hamas Charter.


----------



## Markle (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Which Lebanon war? Israel has been at war with all of its neighbors multiple times. I think there is a common denominator here.



Yeah, funny about that, how a country can get downright testy when their neighbors are sworn to complete what has started thousands of years ago and culminating with your idol, Adolph Hitler.

Have you often wondered why your parents taught you to be an anti-Semite?  Obviously, you are a bigot, are you a racist and sexist too?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 6, 2018)

Markle said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Which Lebanon war? Israel has been at war with all of its neighbors multiple times. I think there is a common denominator here.
> ...


Is third grade name calling all you got?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 6, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Not at all. I couldn't help but notice you shuffled off when your silly "they want just want freedom" comment was refuted by the text of the Hamas Charter.
> 
> In fact, the term "freedom" does not appear in the Hamas Charter.


You're forgetting the reason Hamas wrote the Charter that way, was in response to Israeli aggression.


----------



## Markle (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



How am I calling any names?  I posted a fact and asked you a question.  Why are you afraid to answer?


----------



## Hollie (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Not at all. I couldn't help but notice you shuffled off when your silly "they want just want freedom" comment was refuted by the text of the Hamas Charter.
> ...



You're forgetting that you put yourself in quite a predicament with your baseless and false claims. You're now forced to retreat to another baseless claim as a means to sidestep your earlier baseless claim.


From the Hamas Charter;

_Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)._

As we see, the mere existence of Israel is the cause for gee-had.

Continuing:

*Article Twenty-Eight:*
The Zionist invasion is a vicious invasion. It does not refrain from resorting to all methods, using all evil and contemptible ways to achieve its end. It relies greatly in its infiltration and espionage operations on the secret organizations it gave rise to, such as the Freemasons, The Rotary and Lions clubs, and other sabotage groups. All these organizations, whether secret or open, work in the interest of Zionism and according to its instructions. They aim at undermining societies, destroying values, corrupting consciences, deteriorating character and annihilating Islam. It is behind the drug trade and alcoholism in all its kinds so as to facilitate its control and expansion.

Arab countries surrounding Israel are asked to open their borders before the fighters from among the Arab and Islamic nations so that they could consolidate their efforts with those of their Moslem brethren in Palestine.

As for the other Arab and Islamic countries, they are asked to facilitate the movement of the fighters from and to it, and this is the least thing they could do.




There's lots more insensate Jew hatred in the Hamas Charter and with clear references to muhammedan ideology. How strange that your nonsense claim that "they just want freedom" appears nowhere in the Hamas Charter. No mention of "freedom" at all.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Not at all. I couldn't help but notice you shuffled off when your silly "they want just want freedom" comment was refuted by the text of the Hamas Charter.
> ...


Tell us the whole story.

And also tell us why the word Palestinians seem to be absent from this charter and in its place we do find the following ones:

Islamic World
Islamic Resistance Movement
The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine

Jihad

[ I just love this part of the charter ]

Moreover, if the links have been distant from each other and if obstacles, placed by those who are the lackeys of Zionism in the way of the fighters obstructed the continuation of the struggle, *the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise*, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: 

*"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).*


*---------------*

What is this promise made to Allah?

[ Here is another favorite.  There are so many in that Charter ]

*The Slogan of the Islamic Resistance Movement:*

*Article Eight:*
Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model, the Koran its constitution: Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes.

-----------

[ Still no mention of Palestinians and their rights to the land of Palestine ]


[  Islamic Waqf  -  Still nothing about Palestinian Rights ]

The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day.


The Avalon Project : Hamas Covenant 1988



[   Is this about the rights of Palestinians, or the rights of Muslims in general ?   ]


----------



## Slyhunter (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Read the post again.
> ...


Arabs are trying to remove Israelites from their God given lands.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The Arab Palestinians have been there for generations and do have rights. Never have I disputed that.
> ...


Germany lost it's war, Israel didn't.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 6, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


They reject any version of peace that allows Israelites to live in their historic lands in peace.


----------



## Shusha (May 6, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> And then, as British forces withdrew from the area, Zionist militias started taking more area than was allocated in the Mandate.
> !




The entire territory was designated as the NATIONal Homeland for the Jewish people.  So no, they didn't 'take any land that didn't belong to them'. Unless you are going to try to convince me that Israel crossed international boundaries with Jordan, Egypt and Syria in 1948 and took parts of their territories. Which would be ridiculous.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 7, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


 

Germany initiated its War, Israel didn’t.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Hollie said:


> You're forgetting that you put yourself in quite a predicament with your baseless and false claims. You're now forced to retreat to another baseless claim as a means to sidestep your earlier baseless claim.


The only way a claim is baseless, is if you don't provide a corroborating link.  I provide links.



Hollie said:


> From the Hamas Charter;
> 
> _Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)._
> 
> As we see, the mere existence of Israel is the cause for gee-had.


The clock doesn't start _after_ the existence of Israel, but what Zionists did to create it.



Hollie said:


> Continuing:
> 
> *Article Twenty-Eight:*
> The Zionist invasion is a vicious invasion. It does not refrain from resorting to all methods, using all evil and contemptible ways to achieve its end. It relies greatly in its infiltration and espionage operations on the secret organizations it gave rise to, such as the Freemasons, The Rotary and Lions clubs, and other sabotage groups. All these organizations, whether secret or open, work in the interest of Zionism and according to its instructions. They aim at undermining societies, destroying values, corrupting consciences, deteriorating character and annihilating Islam. It is behind the drug trade and alcoholism in all its kinds so as to facilitate its control and expansion.
> ...


True statement.  That's why they don't like Israel.




Hollie said:


> There's lots more insensate Jew hatred in the Hamas Charter and with clear references to muhammedan ideology. How strange that your nonsense claim that "they just want freedom" appears nowhere in the Hamas Charter. No mention of "freedom" at all.


I don't see anywhere where they talk about Jews.  Their issue is with Zionists.

As far as freedom, you don't live under martial law.  You're a valley girl.  Which, BTW, has its own problems.

No deals can be made without the ending of martial law.


----------



## Hollie (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You're forgetting that you put yourself in quite a predicament with your baseless and false claims. You're now forced to retreat to another baseless claim as a means to sidestep your earlier baseless claim.
> ...



So, then. Provide a link to who is living under martial law.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Tell us the whole story.
> 
> And also tell us why the word Palestinians seem to be absent from this charter and in its place we do find the following ones:
> 
> ...


I do agree most of that language is stupid.  But it is a 40 year old document that is no longer relevant.  More recently, Hamas has a new charter...

*HAMAS OFFICIAL: GROUP'S NEW CHARTER TO ADDRESS ANTISEMITIC LANGUAGE
*
_A senior Hamas official on Wednesday said that the Palestinian terror organization is set to release a new charter that addresses the antisemitic language contained in the group's original mission statement. 

Osama Hamdan told Al Jazeera that Hamas will be publishing its new charter "very soon," and that the language in the new document is careful not to castigate anyone based on "religion" or "race."_

_We will have a clear political document, which is supposed to be in the near future, clarifying all those points,” Hamdan told "UpFront" host Mehdi Hasan.

“You will find in this document clear words that *we [are] against the Zionists, against the occupation of our lands and we will resist the occupiers, whoever they were*," he added._
​So stop throwing a 40 year old document in peoples faces.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> Arabs are trying to remove Israelites from their God given lands.


Palestinians are the Israelites.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> Germany lost it's war, Israel didn't.


So you agree with Hitler, _might makes right?_


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Shusha said:


> The entire territory was designated as the NATIONal Homeland for the Jewish people.  So no, they didn't 'take any land that didn't belong to them'. Unless you are going to try to convince me that Israel crossed international boundaries with Jordan, Egypt and Syria in 1948 and took parts of their territories. Which would be ridiculous.


As long as you didn't disenfranchise the indigenous, non-Jewish population. Which is exactly what you did.  And no, you were not given the entire area.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Germany initiated its War, Israel didn’t.


Israel started the war to.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Hollie said:


> So, then. Provide a link to who is living under martial law.



*Why does Israel rule the West Bank through martial law as opposed to civil law like in Israel proper and the Golan Heights?*​


----------



## Hollie (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > So, then. Provide a link to who is living under martial law.
> ...



Per the link:

To clarify, Israeli citizens (“settlers”) in the West-Bank live under BOTH Israeli civil law AND the military law.


So where is the document declaring martial law?


----------



## Hollie (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Tell us the whole story.
> ...



Why would anyone ignore a "living", active document that appeals to religious motives for committing genocide against an entire population?

Why would anyone ignore a document that calls for ones destruction when the stated goals of that ideological perspective are being pursued at this very moment?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 7, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...



He”s not capable of understanding that you don’t  use “ civil law” for those whose goal is your destruction


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2018)

Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, _et al,_

If the Arab Palestinian is disenfranchised, it is a political self-inflected wound.



Billo_Really said:


> As long as you didn't disenfranchise the indigenous, non-Jewish population. Which is exactly what you did.  And no, you were not given the entire area.


*(COMMENT)*

Territorial sovereignty wise, the territory was an "Article 16" matter for the Allied Powers _(the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned)_; NOT a matter for the people once considered subjects under the purview of the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration _(British military administration over Levantine and Mesopotamian provinces of the former Ottoman Empire established following the Sinai and Palestine Campaign of the Great War)_.  The Military Administration was established to govern the territory → what would later be placed under a Civil Administration guided by a Mandate; approved by the Council of the League of Nations.  "His Majesty the King in Council enacted, on August 10th, 1922, the Palestine Order in Council, which defined the powers of the High Commissioner, prescribed the formation of an Executive Council and of a Legislative Council, and regulated the constitution and powers of the Palestine Judiciary, with special provisions for religious and for tribal Courts."  (See: Report on the Palestine Administration of 1922)  Palestine, as established by the agreement of the Allied Powers, was not placed in the hands of the indigenous population.  It was directed that "the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers."  Hense the Government of Palestine was born, not from the toil and political need of the population, but through the inspiration of the Allied Powers.  The 1919 Inter-Allied Commission (AKA:  The King-Crane Commission) on Mandates in Turkey, reporting on the situation in Palestine they said:

“The Peace Conference should not shut its eyes to the fact that the anti-Zionist feeling in Palestine and Syria is intense and not lightly to be flouted. No British officer, consulted by the commissioners, believed that the Zionist programme could be carried out except by forces of arms.”

Early on in the Mandate era, the Arab Palestinians disenfranchise themselves by 1923, a third attempt was made to establish an institution through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government; a rejected notion but a reoccurring theme the Arab Palestinians would play over and over again.  Even today, the Arab Palestinians operate essentially under the Khartoum Resolutions (The Three NO's).

The Arab Palestinians are doing it to themselves.  They could have had so much more, then they have now → but chose the path of violence instead.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 7, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> The Military Administration was established to govern the territory → what would later be placed under a Civil Administration guided by a Mandate; approved by the Council of the League of Nations.


Which was a lie. The Palestinians were not allowed to form their own government, or create and enforce their own laws. They remained under British military occupation until 1948.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 7, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> The 1919 Inter-Allied Commission (AKA: The King-Crane Commission) on Mandates in Turkey, reporting on the situation in Palestine they said:
> 
> “The Peace Conference should not shut its eyes to the fact that the anti-Zionist feeling in Palestine and Syria is intense and not lightly to be flouted. No British officer, consulted by the commissioners, believed that the Zionist programme could be carried out except by forces of arms.”


Military force against the people flies in the face of "in the best interest of the people" specified in the LoN Covenant. It was a direct violation of the rights of the people.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Military Administration was established to govern the territory → what would later be placed under a Civil Administration guided by a Mandate; approved by the Council of the League of Nations.
> ...


Which Palestinians?

Not the Jewish Palestinians for sure.

Know why?

Because they were not busy attacking Arabs from 1920 to 1948 to keep them for building infrastructure and a Nation of their own.

They were offered it twice and twice declined it because the Arab "Palestinians' s not only did not consider themselves Palestinians at all, but wanted what was left of the Mandate (minus TransJordan) to themselves.

Not for "Palestinians" but for the Muslim Nation.

It is always been about Islam.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Do you shovel Israeli shit for a living?

BTW, the Jewish Palestinians were opposed to a Jewish state. They viewed it as generations of bloodshed. They were right. But intelligent was shoved aside and stupid carried the day.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You need to read your first sentence several times and understand whose shit is going around.

The Jewish Palestinians would have chosen another 1700 years of Arab Muslims on Jews bloodshed without any Jews being allowed to defend themselves as it had been for the past 1700 ones?

Really?

Quite suicidal, wouldn't you say?

Especially after Al Husseini showed the world how tolerant Arab Muslims have always been to Jews, with the Arab riots of 1920 and 1929.

Your manure has been exposed.  Shovel it.


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2018)

Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_

That is another one of your most favorite stances.  If someone promotes a perspective different from yours, it is a "lie."  It is a milder form of the "condition called intermittent explosive disorder."  



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Military Administration was established to govern the territory → what would later be placed under a Civil Administration guided by a Mandate; approved by the Council of the League of Nations.
> ...


*(SERIOUSLY)*

For whatever reason, the bulk of the Arab Palestinians, west of the Jordan, did not want to participate in the establishment of the right tools in the moving towards the self-governing institution.

And nobody trusted the Arab Palestinians to establish an autonomous national home for the protection of the Jewish people.  In my opinion, ha the Allied Powers allowed the entirety of the original territory under the Mandate, it would have spelled doom for the Jewish Culture.  

The Arab Palestinians have been stomping their feet and throwing a tantrum like little children, then acting like adults and build a nation they could be proud to be a member.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Ropey (May 7, 2018)

Roses are red,
Sunsets are too.
While in Jerusalem,
It's red and blue.







Out damned spot!   Yet there it is.

Soon Al-Aqsa will be gone.


----------



## Hollie (May 7, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> That is another one of your most favorite stances.  If someone promotes a perspective different from yours, it is a "lie."  It is a milder form of the "condition called intermittent explosive disorder."
> ...



I've noted to PF Timore on earlier occasions if he would like to opine why it is that the Jewish people, similar to those in Hong Kong, South Korea, Vietnam and elsewhere were able to establish self-determination and build their futures without the whining and moaning offered as excuses for Arab-Moslem incompetence and ineptitude?

If memory serves, that was met with a cut and paste youtube video.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 7, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> For whatever reason, the bulk of the Arab Palestinians, west of the Jordan, did not want to participate in the establishment of the right tools in the moving towards the self-governing institution.


It is not whatever the reason it is that they were expected to accept minority status in their own country.

What other people in the world would accept that?

Give me some names.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 7, 2018)

Hollie said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...


I was in Vietnam under occupation. It was not pretty. It wasn't until after we left that they had the opportunity to build their country. The Palestinians cannot do anything until after the occupation leaves.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > For whatever reason, the bulk of the Arab Palestinians, west of the Jordan, did not want to participate in the establishment of the right tools in the moving towards the self-governing institution.
> ...


The Arabs are not the Indigenous/native people of the region called Palestine, aka Land of Israel.

Their Islamic mentality is what keeps them from accepting a Jewish Nation on any land they have conquered, especially - even if -  that land really is the Ancient Homeland of the Jewish People, the land they were always present on.

Live with it.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


The "Palestinians" are the occupiers.

There are no Jews in Gaza.  Three are no Jews in Jordan.   ALL OF IT, Jewish land.    Time for them to move on.
They won't because Islam demands they take the land back to Muslim hands. 

Muslims are from Arabia.
Arabs are from Arabia.
Palestinian Arabs are from Arabia.

They are welcome to go back to be a majority over there if they choose, regardless of the Saudi Clan which controls the region.

Good Luck  !!!!


----------



## Hollie (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


All your usual fantasies / typical excuses for a societal illness that afflicts the vast majority of the Islamist Middle East. 

And again you sidestep any accounting of why those in Hong Kong, South Korea, Vietnam and elsewhere were able to establish self-determination and build their futures when regions of the planet suffering under the scourge of Islamism cannot. 

Did I suggest a clue?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


The citizens of Palestine are not the natives. The settlers out of Europe are the natives?


----------



## Hollie (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Turkish subjects living in one for the Vllayets of the Ottoman Empire, a portion of which was within the geographic area of Palestine, were Turkish subjects. Turkish invaders were not native people.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


The "settlers" out of Europe happened to go to Europe from the Land of Israel.

Therefore they are not "settlers", but the natives of the Land of Israel.

Something which no Arab, Palestinian or not, happens to be, as they do come from the Arabian Peninsula.


Smile


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 7, 2018)

Ropey said:


> Roses are red,
> Sunsets are too.
> While in Jerusalem,
> It's red and blue.
> ...



THANK YOU !!!!!!


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2018)

Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_

OH, that is ridiculous.  You cannot use "Occupation" as a rule.  US Forces were in both Korea and Europe for as long.  As a matter of fact, they are still there.  The presence of foreign troops does not preclude development.  The difference is the combative nature and tension between the host country and the foreign forces.  In both Korea and Europe, the combative and tension levels worked towards a near zero in intensity.  In the case of Israel: West Bank/Gaza, the combative and tension levels are held artificially high by Hostile Palestinian Forces supported by externals like Iran.



P F Tinmore said:


> I was in Vietnam under occupation. It was not pretty. It wasn't until after we left that they had the opportunity to build their country. The Palestinians cannot do anything until after the occupation leaves.


*(COMMENT)*

HAMAS continually calls on the people in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Arab populations in Israelis to maintain the border demonstrations, and initiate another intifada, ✪⇒ “We want the uprising to last and continue to let Trump and the occupation [Israel] regret this decision.” He previously warned that Trump’s decision “will open the gates of hell on US interests in the region.”

It was a year ago that the House of Representatives introduced HR 2712 _(*Palestinian International Terrorism Support Prevention Act of 2017*)_.   ψ  It is intended to impose sanctions with respect to foreign support for Palestinian terrorism, and for other purposes; to prevent Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, or any affiliate or successor from accessing its international support networks.  Why, because HAMAS has threatened to use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the interests of the United States.

The reason that Israel is 18th on the Human Development Index Scale _(higher than any other Arab League Nation - including the oil-rich nations and any member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (*GCC*) Countries)_ and the State of Palestine is 114th which is:

•  LOWER than Egypt, Turkmenistan, and Indonesia ---
•  HIGHER THAN Viet Nam *(your example)*, the Philippines and El Salvador ---​
The Arab Palestinians, if the turned that energy inward, could rise to be the shining star in the Arab World.  But it would rather be violent and make calls for war in violation of the Charter. the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly 110 (II) Measures to be taken against propaganda and the inciters of a new war, and the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly 2625 (XXV). Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nation.

That is why the (socalled) State of Palestine is plunging toward the world record drive into economic failure.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The entire territory was designated as the NATIONal Homeland for the Jewish people.  So no, they didn't 'take any land that didn't belong to them'. Unless you are going to try to convince me that Israel crossed international boundaries with Jordan, Egypt and Syria in 1948 and took parts of their territories. Which would be ridiculous.
> ...



Hum. Have you not read the Mandate for Palestine? 

The entire territory was set aside for the NATIONal homeland for the Jewish people.

There was no division made. And there was no other peoples mentioned.

Now, you could very well argue that this was an egregious oversight and needs to be corrected. I wouldn't argue with you. The WAY to correct the oversight is to negotiate for peace and sovereignty for both peoples in a way that is fair and reasonable and NOT in a way which insists on narratives and propaganda.


----------



## Markle (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Military Administration was established to govern the territory → what would later be placed under a Civil Administration guided by a Mandate; approved by the Council of the League of Nations.
> ...



So how does any of that give the Hamas, and the other surrounding countries, the right to commit genocide?


----------



## Markle (May 7, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> I was in Vietnam under occupation. It was not pretty. It wasn't until after we left that they had the opportunity to build their country. The Palestinians cannot do anything until after the occupation leaves.



After we left, North Vietnam killed MILLIONS.  That's what you want for Israel?  All Jews to be exterminated?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Per the link:
> 
> To clarify, Israeli citizens (“settlers”) in the West-Bank live under BOTH Israeli civil law AND the military law.
> 
> ...


The Israeli insurgents (settlers), are not subject to martial law, only the Palestinians are.  

I have not seen a formal declaration of martial law.  But that is the reality Palestinians are living under.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Hollie said:


> Why would anyone ignore a "living", active document that appeals to religious motives for committing genocide against an entire population?
> 
> Why would anyone ignore a document that calls for ones destruction when the stated goals of that ideological perspective are being pursued at this very moment?


It's not a living document, its been replaced.  Why would anyone keep pointing to something now irrelevant, when they have been shown the evidence there position is no longer current.

And why do you keep saying they want to destroy Israel, while Israel is actively destroying them?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> He”s not capable of understanding that you don’t  use “ civil law” for those whose goal is your destruction


Even when shown evidence to the contrary, you hold on to your bullshit beliefs.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ Billo_Really, _et al,_
> 
> If the Arab Palestinian is disenfranchised, it is a political self-inflected wound.
> ...


WTF are you talking about?  The indigenous Palestinian-Arabs in that area, are a concerned party and they have rights.  They were also the majority land owners, up until that time.

Dude, do you have to make every response a data dump?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Per the link:
> ...


You have not seen a "formal" declaration of martial law because.....


Drum roll........


THERE ISN'T ONE.

There is no Martial Law from Israel on the Arab Palestinians.

Not Now.

Not Ever.

Now, if you would like to discuss what the Arab Palestinians are dealing  with under Hamas' power.......


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...


Let us put it in a very simple form.

Arabs are Indigenous of Arabia.  And ONLY of Arabia.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Hum. Have you not read the Mandate for Palestine?
> 
> The entire territory was set aside for the NATIONal homeland for the Jewish people.
> 
> ...


You fucking shoot Palestinian children in the head for throwing a rock!  Don't even talk to me about what's fair and reasonable.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Why would anyone ignore a "living", active document that appeals to religious motives for committing genocide against an entire population?
> ...


The Mandate was not replaced.  It was fulfilled on May 14, 1948 with the creation of Israel, which is what the Mandate had been about from the very beginning since 1920.

The only difference is that the Jews ended up losing 80% of their indigenous land by the British giving 78% to the Hashemite Clan from Arabia in 1925, which became TranJordan in 1946.

As long as you refuse to read the PLO and Hamas Charters, then you will never have to admit that the sum intent of all of these Muslim groups is to destroy Israel.

What do you think seven Arab countries were doing together in 1948 as they invaded the day after Israel declared Independence?

Rejoicing that now there finally was, again, a sovereign state for the Jews ?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Hum. Have you not read the Mandate for Palestine?
> ...


You are watching way too many Pallywood productions.

You just love being fooled.

That is on you, not Israel.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> You have not seen a "formal" declaration of martial law because.....
> 
> 
> Drum roll........
> ...


WTF do you think a military occupation is?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Let us put it in a very simple form.
> 
> Arabs are Indigenous of Arabia.  And ONLY of Arabia.


Wrong!  They've been living there for 2000 years.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > You have not seen a "formal" declaration of martial law because.....
> ...


THERE is NO..... Military Occupation....

Except in your mind.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> The Mandate was not replaced.  It was fulfilled on May 14, 1948 with the creation of Israel, which is what the Mandate had been about from the very beginning since 1920.
> 
> The only difference is that the Jews ended up losing 80% of their indigenous land by the British giving 78% to the Hashemite Clan from Arabia in 1925, which became TranJordan in 1946.
> 
> ...


We were talking about the Hamas Charter being replaced, not the Mandate.  My God, are you vapid!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> You are watching way too many Pallywood productions.
> 
> You just love being fooled.
> 
> That is on you, not Israel.


Why is it a Pallywood production?  And why should anyone believe you?  There isn't a single post of yours that shows any empathy for what these people are going through.  So you are not the greatest source in the world for saying something is fake.  You just say it is, because you don't have the balls to face reality.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Let us put it in a very simple form.
> ...


Wrong.  The Arabs invaded the Land of Israel in the 7th Century.

That makes it now 1400 years.

Living in a place, being born there, does not make one the Indigenous people OVER the actual indigenous people who had been there for 3800 years.....namely the Jewish people, which are acknowledged as being there when, first the Kurdish Muslims invaded, and then the Aran Muslims invaded a bit later.

And it was the Arab Muslims who did, what the Christian Romans or Byzantine would not do.

They allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem because they knew of the connection and importance of Jerusalem (closed to the Jews since 70 CE by the Romans) to the Jewish People.

Jews are from Judea

Arabs are from Arabia

It has not changed even after 1400 years.


----------



## RoccoR (May 7, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  Billo_Really, et al,

The territories are NOT _per say_, under Martial Law.  The UN Security Council imposes *S/RES/446 (1979)* Use of the Geneva Convention 22 March 1979, which in turn imposes Artice 43 of the Hague Regulation.

*Article 43*. The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country. ​


Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Per the link:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Israelis of the Settlements will always be under Israeli Law _(as directed by the civil administration)_, until the final negotiated agreement is established.

You will not see a formal declaration of Martial Law, and the Arab Palestinians are not under anything like Martial Law.  

Most of the time, when the media reports a clash with the IDF, they are actually misidentifying or confusing the Israeli Border Police with the IDF.

That little rabble-rouser Ahed Tamimi is a puppet Palestinian activist being used to induce confrontations between Hostile Arab Palestinians and the Police of the Civil Administration for the media value. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> THERE is NO..... Military Occupation....
> 
> Except in your mind.


Fuck you, bitch!  Every country on the planet says there is.  Over 200 UN resolutions say there is.  You are full of shit!


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > The Mandate was not replaced.  It was fulfilled on May 14, 1948 with the creation of Israel, which is what the Mandate had been about from the very beginning since 1920.
> ...


When was the Hamas Charter replaced?

Replaced for what ?

Do show us where it says they do not intend to destroy Israel anymore and take over that whole land.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > You are watching way too many Pallywood productions.
> ...


I have absolutely no empathy for Hamas and its intention of killing every Jew, and possibly non Jew in Israel.

I and Israel have more than empathy for those who are under Hamas and the PA.

Israel gives healthcare, jobs and education to many Palestinians.

What Military Occupation when so many Palestinians are allowed on a daily basis to enter Israel in order to work, go to school or receive health care?

What country would ever do that for the people when the leaders are very much intent in destroying that very country?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > THERE is NO..... Military Occupation....
> ...


How you love to exaggerate.

You are full of hateful ignorance towards the Jewish People.

I would suggest stop feeding your very hungry Catholic Irish self.

That is what Catholicism has been feeding all Christians since Christianity was founded.

Hate those Jews.  And you do it to perfection.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> THERE is NO..... Military Occupation....
> 
> Except in your mind.


If there is no military occupation, why can't Gazans leave?  If there is no military occupation, then what are the over 300 roadblocks and checkpoints restricting Palestinian movement?

You're not making the world a better place by lying about the facts.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Wrong.  The Arabs invaded the Land of Israel in the 7th Century.
> 
> That makes it now 1400 years.
> 
> ...


If you've been living there for 3800 years, there's no reason to return.  You're already there!

Stripping Palestinians (who have been living there for generations), of their land rights, is pure evil.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > THERE is NO..... Military Occupation....
> ...


There is not ONE Israeli in Gaza, military or civilian to turn your fabled "Military Occupation" into reality.

By all means, do not ever question why Egypt also has its borders with Gaza closed, only allowing them into Egypt a few times per year, unlike Israel which allows people with health issues to come into Israel.

Why in the world would both Israel AND Egypt close their borders to the people of Gaza. 



Israel and Egypt keep Gaza Strip borders shut


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> The Israelis of the Settlements will always be under Israeli Law _(as directed by the civil administration)_, until the final negotiated agreement is established.


There's not going to be any negotiation, the settlements are illegal.  



RoccoR said:


> You will not see a formal declaration of Martial Law, and the Arab Palestinians are not under anything like Martial Law.


Then what are the over 300 checkpoints and roadblocks in the West Bank for?



RoccoR said:


> Most of the time, when the media reports a clash with the IDF, they are actually misidentifying or confusing the Israeli Border Police with the IDF.


I don't care if it is Mother Theresa, IDF snipers are shooting unarmed Palestinian's and journalists with big media badges on their chest.



RoccoR said:


> That little rabble-rouser Ahed Tamimi is a puppet Palestinian activist being used to induce confrontations between Hostile Arab Palestinians and the Police of the Civil Administration for the media value.


That's a 15 year old girl (who's brother you murdered in cold blood), that you have imprisoned for slapping member of the IDF (who was wearing body armour).  You go to hell!




RoccoR said:


> Most Respectfully,
> R


When it is not passed into the hands of the occupant, it is still an occupation.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong.  The Arabs invaded the Land of Israel in the 7th Century.
> ...


What lands rights?

To all of the land of Israel?

Only in your dreams .

The Ottoman Empire was the owner of the lands.  They lost WWI, they lost the land.  Simple.

People working the land owned by the Ottomans, is not the same as those people actually "owning" the land.

<<If you've been living there for 3800 years, there's no reason to return.  You're already there!>>

Sovereignty was returned to the Jewish People for their land.

It was the right think to do, regardless of the fact that they have lost 80 % of it to the Muslims.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> When was the Hamas Charter replaced?
> 
> Replaced for what ?
> 
> Do show us where it says they do not intend to destroy Israel anymore and take over that whole land.


I just posted the link.  Go read it!


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> I have absolutely no empathy for Hamas and its intention of killing every Jew, and possibly non Jew in Israel.
> 
> I and Israel have more than empathy for those who are under Hamas and the PA.
> 
> ...


How is lying about the facts making it a better place?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> How you love to exaggerate.
> 
> You are full of hateful ignorance towards the Jewish People.
> 
> ...


Why would I hate Jews?

And give me one country, just one, who recognizes Israel's right to that land.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> There is not ONE Israeli in Gaza, military or civilian to turn your fabled "Military Occupation" into reality.
> 
> By all means, do not ever question why Egypt also has its borders with Gaza closed, only allowing them into Egypt a few times per year, unlike Israel which allows people with health issues to come into Israel.
> 
> ...


Do you know what "effective control" is?  If you don't, then you are not qualified to even discuss this issue.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> What lands rights?


These...


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Israelis of the Settlements will always be under Israeli Law _(as directed by the civil administration)_, until the final negotiated agreement is established.
> ...


Illegal in your mind only.  Since you are not the UN or the interested sides.....your opinion does not count.

Check points are in Judea and Samaria to keep the Palestinians from killing anyone living in Israel, when they come for work, education or health reason into the country.

The journalist you are referring to was a member of Hamas.
Many of the Palestinians are armed with explosives and guns.
You are simply not paying attention to it, or not wanting to know about it.

Why are you accusing Rocco of murdering Ahed's brother?

What would be Ahed's brother's name?

Any other country would have arrested Ahed and given her more time in jail.

In the Middle East, in the Arab countries,  attacking law enforcement sometimes you may be shot dead on the spot.

Compare that with spending a few months in jail for the same crime.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > There is not ONE Israeli in Gaza, military or civilian to turn your fabled "Military Occupation" into reality.
> ...


Hamas has effective control of Gaza.  Just ask Egypt which has the same issues with Gaza that Israel has had since 2007.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > What lands rights?
> ...


Link to the map, please.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > How you love to exaggerate.
> ...


The UN is full of countries which recognized Israel's right to its ancestral land.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > How you love to exaggerate.
> ...



The *international recognition of Israel*refers to the diplomatic recognition of the State of Israel, which was established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948. Israel's status is disputed due to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Out of the 192 other UN member states, 161 currently recognize Israel. Some states recognise Israel as a state, but have no diplomatic relations

(vide full list online)

International recognition of Israel - Wikipedia


----------



## jillian (May 7, 2018)

Daryl Hunt said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> Ed MorrisseyPosted at 12:01 pm on April 30, 2018
> Or maybe they should stop sucking up to Iran. That’s the real subtext of the surprising rhetoric coming from Mohammed bin Salman, the young crown prince of Saudi Arabia who’s rewriting the Middle East script after seizing power in a family feud last year. Barak Ravid reports for Axios that MBS, as he’s colloquially known, told representatives of Jewish groups last month that while Saudi Arabia still wants a just and lasting settlement for the Palestinians, they could have gotten that themselves.
> 
> ...



the Saudi prince is right. they were offered 98% of what they wanted. but that would presume they want peace. they don't.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Illegal in your mind only.  Since you are not the UN or the interested sides.....your opinion does not count.


I'm quoting the UN.  And the Israeli government.

_*Even Israel says this Jewish settlement is illegal.*_
_
*Israeli high court rejects government plea, orders West Bank settlement removal

The international community considers all Israeli settlements in the occupied territory of the West Bank and Israeli-annexed east Jerusalem to be illegal ...*_​


Sixties Fan said:


> Check points are in Judea and Samaria to keep the Palestinians from killing anyone living in Israel, when they come for work, education or health reason into the country.


The wall is proof of an occupation.



Sixties Fan said:


> The journalist you are referring to was a member of Hamas.
> Many of the Palestinians are armed with explosives and guns.
> You are simply not paying attention to it, or not wanting to know about it.


IDF propaganda.  You can't even prove it.



Sixties Fan said:


> Why are you accusing Rocco of murdering Ahed's brother?


It was the figurative you, not the literal one.



Sixties Fan said:


> What would be Ahed's brother's name?


You're the one who shot him, you tell me.  It's the reason why the girl slapped the IDF.



Sixties Fan said:


> Any other country would have arrested Ahed and given her more time in jail.


Any other fascist country.



Sixties Fan said:


> In the Middle East, in the Arab countries,  attacking law enforcement sometimes you may be shot dead on the spot.


And that sucks!



Sixties Fan said:


> Compare that with spending a few months in jail for the same crime.


Compare that with a murderer not admitting he committed a crime.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Hamas has effective control of Gaza.  Just ask Egypt which has the same issues with Gaza that Israel has had since 2007.


Then why can't they leave?  Why can't they have weapons?  Why are their imports and exports restricted?  Why can't they fish and farm without getting shot at?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Link to the map, please.


Oh for Christs sake, it's a UN map.  I'll get the link when I have a little time.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> The UN is full of countries which recognized Israel's right to its ancestral land.


I know.  But they don't recognize the land Israel took in the '67 war.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> The *international recognition of Israel*refers to the diplomatic recognition of the State of Israel, which was established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948. Israel's status is disputed due to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Out of the 192 other UN member states, 161 currently recognize Israel. Some states recognise Israel as a state, but have no diplomatic relations
> 
> (vide full list online)
> 
> International recognition of Israel - Wikipedia


At the time Zionists stood up and declared Israel a state, UN representatives had asked them to delay the announcement. And when they did announce it, they were 10% of the population, declaring ownership over 70% of the land.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Illegal in your mind only.  Since you are not the UN or the interested sides.....your opinion does not count.
> ...


It does not matter what the "International Community" has to say.  Christian and Muslim haters of Jews have no say in what is legal or illegal when it comes to Israel and the Jewish People.

The Wall cut down 90 % of the suicide attacks against Israelis.
One can see why you and the Arabs do not like it.

Check my posts on the other thread.  It is full of photos and videos of proof of what you don't like to deal with.

First you accuse Rocco, with the "figurative You", now me.
Really smart.

You know nothing about the Tamimi Clan.

By all means, equate Israel with Fascist and the Arab Muslim countries.  

Your last sentence is illogical.
 There is video of her aggression against law enforcement.  She did it because she was raised to behave that way.  It came the price for her to pay the price for attacking Law enforcement for a change.  She had gotten away with similar behavior before.  Not anymore.
Do not worry, she will not have learned the lesson.  She has the whole Tamimi clan to make sure she, and her sister as well, will continue to be aggressive to IDF soldier anytime there is a camera nearby.


----------



## Markle (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> The Israeli insurgents (settlers), are not subject to martial law, only the Palestinians are.
> 
> I have not seen a formal declaration of martial law. But that is the reality Palestinians are living under.



So you claim Palestinians are living under a declaration of martial law, which does not exist imposed by their elected government, the terrorist group Hamas.

You're a hoot!


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > The *international recognition of Israel*refers to the diplomatic recognition of the State of Israel, which was established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948. Israel's status is disputed due to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Out of the 192 other UN member states, 161 currently recognize Israel. Some states recognise Israel as a state, but have no diplomatic relations
> ...


You are full of it.
Israel declared Independence only over the land where they had worked infrastructure since 1920 and where the Jews were a majority.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > The UN is full of countries which recognized Israel's right to its ancestral land.
> ...


Don't worry, they will come around eventually.
After all, it is the most ancestral of all the Jewish homeland.
The Jordanians took it in a war of aggression in 1948 wanting to annex it and changing the names from Judea and Samaria to West Bank.

The Jordanians have since given the land up.

It is disputed until proper negotiations with the Arab leaders, if they ever come to the table again.

Arafat and Abbas were offered 93 to 98% of the "West Bank" before in negotiations and refused it.
But you don't really know why.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas has effective control of Gaza.  Just ask Egypt which has the same issues with Gaza that Israel has had since 2007.
> ...


Many leave, for the USA or Europe.

Here is how they have no weapons at all.  How do you think they got all of that?

IN PICTURES: Hamas shows off its weapons in military parade marking anniversary


And here are the main places where they store them

Why Hamas stores its weapons inside hospitals, mosques and schools


----------



## Slyhunter (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > Germany lost it's war, Israel didn't.
> ...


Hitler lost.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 7, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > THERE is NO..... Military Occupation....
> ...


I would let them leave. I wouldn't let them come back.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 7, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...



They were also offered most of E. Jerusalem


----------



## Shusha (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > How you love to exaggerate.
> ...




You really need to decide what land, specifically, you are arguing against in terms of Israeli sovereignty. You keep bouncing around discussing events of 1967, events of 1948, events of 1920s and events earlier. You should pick a target and stick with it. At least then you'll be consistently wrong.

Meantime, let me remind you that international law is not a popularity contest. And let me also remind you that MOST countries recognize Israel's absolute right to sovereignty in some portion of the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine. Further MOST countries recognize that final borders between Israel and a new State of Palestine can only be determined by negotiation and treaty, which is in line with all recognized international law.

As can be seen in recent developments many Arab nations are also supporting Israeli rights to peaceful sovereignty.

Palestinians are running out of supporters.


----------



## Shusha (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Hum. Have you not read the Mandate for Palestine?
> ...



Theoretically then, you would fully support Israeli citizens entering Gaza through the fence with wire cutters, yes?  

You would agree that Gaza has no right to defend her border with Israel and that Israelis should be able to pass freely between Israel and Gaza?

And that would include Israelis who make threats against the lives of Gazan citizens, right?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> It does not matter what the "International Community" has to say.  Christian and Muslim haters of Jews have no say in what is legal or illegal when it comes to Israel and the Jewish People.


Stop using Judaism as an excuse to treat people like garbage.  This has nothing to do with Jews.  BTW, I also quoted the Israeli High Court.  Is the Israeli High Court Jew haters? 



Sixties Fan said:


> The Wall cut down 90 % of the suicide attacks against Israelis.
> One can see why you and the Arabs do not like it.


The wall is illegal and on land that is not Israel's.  Furthermore, according to the _*Red Cross*_...

_[the wall] not only violates IHL but further undermines the living conditions of the affected communities – depriving them of normal economic and social connections, and hindering their access to their jobs, their fields, their schools, their health-care centres, and their places of worship. The fact that the Barrier now reaches deep into Palestinian territory, with a projected total length of more than twice that of the 315 km Green Line, is seriously curtailing freedom of movement in certain areas of the West Bank and effectively cutting the land into small isolated parcels. The simultaneous expansion of settlements throughout the West Bank, served by those settlements’ own road network, is effectively increasing the isolation of Palestinian communities._​


Sixties Fan said:


> Check my posts on the other thread.  It is full of photos and videos of proof of what you don't like to deal with.


I'd have to _care_ not to like it.



Sixties Fan said:


> First you accuse Rocco, with the "figurative You", now me.
> Really smart.


I thought so.



Sixties Fan said:


> You know nothing about the Tamimi Clan.


And you know nothing about the truth.



Sixties Fan said:


> By all means, equate Israel with Fascist and the Arab Muslim countries.


I don't have to.  Albert Einstein already did.



Sixties Fan said:


> Your last sentence is illogical.
> There is video of her aggression against law enforcement.  She did it because she was raised to behave that way.  It came the price for her to pay the price for attacking Law enforcement for a change.  She had gotten away with similar behavior before.  Not anymore.
> Do not worry, she will not have learned the lesson.  She has the whole Tamimi clan to make sure she, and her sister as well, will continue to be aggressive to IDF soldier anytime there is a camera nearby.


You make such a fine German.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Markle said:


> So you claim Palestinians are living under a declaration of martial law, which does not exist imposed by their elected government, the terrorist group Hamas.
> 
> You're a hoot!


When you were a kid, did you have to wear hockey equipment, but you weren't on a team?

Because your post was a little mental.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> You are full of it.
> Israel declared Independence only over the land where they had worked infrastructure since 1920 and where the Jews were a majority.


According to _*UN records*_...

_From writings of Zionist leaders, it is evident that Zionist policy was to occupy, during the period of withdrawal, as much territory as possible (including the "West Bank") *beyond the boundaries assigned to the Jewish State by the partition resolution*._​


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Don't worry, they will come around eventually.
> After all, it is the most ancestral of all the Jewish homeland.
> The Jordanians took it in a war of aggression in 1948 wanting to annex it and changing the names from Judea and Samaria to West Bank.
> 
> ...


What do you mean, "come around"?

Was Germany allowed to keep Poland?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> Hitler lost.


It's still the same philosophy.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> They were also offered most of E. Jerusalem


Can't offer what you don't have.  East Jerusalem is not Israeli property.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> You really need to decide what land, specifically, you are arguing against in terms of Israeli sovereignty. You keep bouncing around discussing events of 1967, events of 1948, events of 1920s and events earlier. You should pick a target and stick with it. At least then you'll be consistently wrong.
> 
> Meantime, let me remind you that international law is not a popularity contest. And let me also remind you that MOST countries recognize Israel's absolute right to sovereignty in some portion of the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine. Further MOST countries recognize that final borders between Israel and a new State of Palestine can only be determined by negotiation and treaty, which is in line with all recognized international law.
> 
> ...


I have been very clear that it was the land seized in the '67 war.  There was no "bouncing" around.  

If you think there is a country that recognizes Israel's right to that land, then lets see the evidence.  Post one.  Just one country.  I'll wait.

You didn't answer my question.  Why would I hate Jews?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Theoretically then, you would fully support Israeli citizens entering Gaza through the fence with wire cutters, yes?
> 
> You would agree that Gaza has no right to defend her border with Israel and that Israelis should be able to pass freely between Israel and Gaza?
> 
> And that would include Israelis who make threats against the lives of Gazan citizens, right?


Your position is absurd.  The Palestinians do not occupy Israeli land.  And the fact that you have no problem shooting unarmed children in the head, says a lot about your lack of humanity.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > They were also offered most of E. Jerusalem
> ...


 
Sorry, but Israel has control of E. Jerusalem now and is never going to give it up. Can’t offer what you don’t have? Then the Palestinians don’t have the right to demand passage between Gaza and the W. Bank on Israeli land. Two can play that game!


----------



## admonit (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > They were also offered most of E. Jerusalem
> ...


Cannot demand what you never have. 


> East Jerusalem is not Israeli property.


I'm sure you can provide your land ownership certificate.


----------



## Shusha (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Your position is absurd.  The Palestinians do not occupy Israeli land.



I agree.  Palestinians do not occupy Israeli land.  But for the same reasons Israel does not occupy Palestinian land.  Why?  Because it is yet to be determined what IS Israeli land and what IS Palestinian land. The negotiation and peace treaty has not yet occurred.  The territory is disputed.

We also agree that by convention, if not by formal treaty, there is a definitive, undisputed (international) boundary between Israel and Gaza, yes?  So what gives Gazan, especially hostile Gazans, the right to cross an international boundary into territory which is NOT THEIRS?  And what removes Israel's right to defend her sovereignty at that boundary?


----------



## Shusha (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> I have been very clear that it was the land seized in the '67 war.  There was no "bouncing" around.



Not true.  You have introduced arguments from the 1948 war, from 1945 and from the pre-Mandate period.  But, still, I appreciate your clarity.  Any further presentation, by you, of arguments from times other than 1967 can be dismissed as being inconsistent with your own claim.  

However, given that Israel HAD sovereign title, in law, to the territory in its entirety; and given that the conflict between 1948 and 1967 and right up to 1988 when Palestine declared independence, was between Israel and the States of Jordan and Egypt and has since been resolved; and given that there is no possible legal claim for an existing international boundary (other than Oslo) your claim is without merit.


----------



## Shusha (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> And the fact that you have no problem shooting unarmed children in the head, says a lot about your lack of humanity.



Aren't you one of those who insist that Gazans and Palestinians have access to lethal weapons in order to 'defend themselves'?  I'm smelling the rank and nasty odor of double standards here.

Objectively, do people have the right to use lethal force to defend themselves or their territory?  Yes or no?  

If YOUR standard is that lethal force can only be used when life is immanently threatened then you SHOULD be championing an end to rockets, mortars, suicide bombings, rock-throwing, stabbings, car-rammings, fire-bombings, wire-cutting, fence-crossing etc, etc, etc.  

So why aren't you?


----------



## Shusha (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Can't offer what you don't have.  East Jerusalem is not Israeli property.



I assure you, having just lived there for three weeks, Israel most certainly does have it.  Why shouldn't it be Israeli property?  Its a Jewish Holy Place, in an ancient Jewish city, on land going back nearly 4000 years in Jewish history.  Why shouldn't it be Israeli property?


----------



## Shusha (May 8, 2018)

Look, the whole point I am trying to argue here is that there is nothing "magical" about the "1967 lines".  There is no point in arguing for a return to some "magical" point in time.

Israel (And I really mean Jews here) needs peace and security.  Arab Palesinians need self-determination and a future.  It makes no difference where the boundary ultimately ends up as long as both those things can be brought into being.


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, _et al,_

Question?  Does Israel say that the Arab Palestinians cannot leave the West Bank?  OR Does Israel say that the Arab Palestinians cannot enter Israel?



Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > THERE is NO..... Military Occupation....
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, there are Military Police units that maintain some of the security control points.

The limitations imposed on the Arab Palestinian movement in any given area response to terrorist attacks --- and --- to prevent Israelis from enetering certain West Bank cities, town and villages.

This is all part and parcel of the Article 43 responsibilities.

The lifting and end to such security measures is based on the reduction in threat.  Since the threat has only gone up, there will probably not be a reduction in security countermeasures.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, et al,

This is just too funny.



Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Israelis of the Settlements will always be under Israeli Law _(as directed by the civil administration)_ until the final negotiated agreement is established.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Then, the likelihood of a change to the _status quo_ is remote.



Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > You will not see a formal declaration of Martial Law, and the Arab Palestinians are not under anything like Martial Law.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Article 43 security measures in the face of continuing threats by Hostile Arab Palestinians.



Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Most of the time, when the media reports a clash with the IDF, they are actually misidentifying or confusing the Israeli Border Police with the IDF.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

HAMAS operatives may not expect to find a shield in the use of "PRESS" Corps patches.  HAMAS has a well-established history of hiding behind protected persons that would otherwise be immune from fire.

Once the post-confrontation investigation starts, there will be (in all likelihood) plenty of HD Video made available showing details of the confrontation and the facial recognition of perpetrators.



Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > That little rabble-rouser Ahed Tamimi is a puppet Palestinian activist being used to induce confrontations between Hostile Arab Palestinians and the Police of the Civil Administration for the media value.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Not the IDF, but Border Police.  And Police all around the world wear body armor.  Hell, I've worn body armor with ceramic ballistic plates.  BUT the wearing of body armor does not grant the perpetrator special permission or right to assault a police officer without facing repercussions.  In fact, in most places in the world, the assault on a police officer or a member of the security services (body armor or not) is cause for a greater penalty.

In many places in the world, there are two legal positions that are obviously not a standard in the Middle East.

•  Parents can be held criminally liable if they have not fulfilled their parental duty to keep their kids from breaking the law.
•  Any adult, may be prosecuted for contributing to the delinquency of a minor if the adult encourages or induces the minor to engage in criminal activity.​
In fact, in some cases, there may be a prosecutorial decision to release the child and prosecute the adult; or to prosecute both for their part in the criminal event.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> OH, that is ridiculous. You cannot use "Occupation" as a rule. US Forces were in both Korea and Europe for as long. As a matter of fact, they are still there. The presence of foreign troops does not preclude development.


But settler colonialism does.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> BUT the wearing of body armor does not grant the perpetrator special permission or right to assault a police officer


Indeed, if it is a local police officer. But these are invading foreign troops. I think that is a different legal scenario.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> Most of the time, when the media reports a clash with the IDF, they are actually misidentifying or confusing the Israeli Border Police with the IDF.


Same shit - different platter.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> What Military Occupation when so many Palestinians are allowed on a daily basis to enter Israel in order to work, go to school or receive health care?


Israel gives back a little of what it has stolen.


----------



## danielpalos (May 8, 2018)

A Dey of Palestine should get more respect and should have better solutions.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Israelis used to vacation in Gaza. It was Israel who slammed the door.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > What Military Occupation when so many Palestinians are allowed on a daily basis to enter Israel in order to work, go to school or receive health care?
> ...


Let us take a look at 1967.
Jordan, instead of listening to Israel and staying out of invading - again - with other Arab countries in order to destroy Israel - decides it wants more land besides Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter it got in 1948.

Jordan is beaten badly and loses every inch of that land.

Land, which by the way, it meant to keep for itself, annex it to Jordan, with no word ever, whatsoever, of giving that land for a future separate Arab country with the Arabs who were living there having sovereignty over it.

Jordan invaded, conquered the land in a war.

Jordan invaded, lost the land in a war.

Winning a land in a defensive war is not stealing, especially when all Jews were expelled from Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem in 1948 in the first Arab countries aggression against Israel.

Parts of Judea and Samaria And the Jewish Quarter, were to become part of Israel during the Partition and the declaration of Independence until seven Arab countries, not the Palestinians, entered and took Gaza and the areas above.

The now called Palestinians, can sit at a table as they were supposed to since the Oslo Accords, and negotiate with Israel.

Arafat, Abbas and all others have refused peace plans which gave the Palestinians most of what they wanted.  That is how negotiations go.  One does not get Everything, that is why it is called Negotiations.


This is the main reason why they did not sign the Peace Treaties:

SADAT ASSASSINATED AT ARMY PARADE AS MEN AMID RANKS FIRE INTO STANDS; VICE PRESIDENT AFFIRMS 'ALL TREATIES'


And since Jordan signed its treaty with Israel in 1994, opposing groups have been trying to do away with it.

Why would Arafat and Abbas sign something which might get them killed?

Not acceptance of non Muslims being sovereign over Muslim conquered land, plus the PLO and Hamas Charters, plus the fear of being assassinated, is what keeps Abbas from seating again at a table and negotiating any deal with Israel. 

 Hamas might need to be a separate negotiation as they would never accept anything Abbas or any other leader would sign.

And this is how they keep wasting one opportunity after another of putting an end to the conflict signing a peace treaty as Egypt and Jordan did.

End Iran's influence in Gaza, the PA, Lebanon and Syria and there may be some opportunity for it.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


Do gives us some more details about those vacations in Gaza.
When was the door slammed?


----------



## danielpalos (May 8, 2018)

a "career path for retired marshals"?  

Marshaling the resources of a region and putting them to good use, is what a Marshal is all about.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Jordan invaded, conquered the land in a war.
> 
> Jordan invaded, lost the land in a war.


You have conflicting terms here. How did Jordan conquer Palestinian land when they were not at war with Palestine? It is illegal to annex occupied territory so Jordan's attempt was not valid. The West Bank remained Palestinian land. Did Israel win Palestinian land from Jordan? No, it was not Jordan's land to lose.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Jordan invaded, conquered the land in a war.
> ...


It was not Palestinian land.  It was Mandate for Palestine land, and some was to go to the Jewish People, some to the Arabs (not yet calling themselves Palestinians )

By all means skip the part where the Jordanians expelled all the Jews from Judea, Samaria and the JEWISH Quarter of Jerusalem, just as they had done in 1925 when they were "given"
all of TranJordan when they were not part of the Mandate for Palestine.


Now, when was Israel vacationing in Gaza?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Jordan invaded, conquered the land in a war.
> ...


Unless you are talking about private property rights, there is no such thing as Palestinian land.  The land Jordan captured was land that had been abandoned by the UN when it ended the Mandate in the Partition resolution and at that time, Jordan had as much right to the land as anyone else, and Israel and Jordan have settled their differences arising from the earlier wars so Israel now is the only country with a legitimate claim to the land.  

There is no rational basis in history, logic or law for the Palestinians to claim the land is theirs.  However, just as Israel has been willing to barter land it captured in the earlier wars for peace with Egypt, Syria and Jordan, so Israel has offered to give some of this land to the Palestinians in return for peace, but there is no political entity among the Palestinian leaderships that can credibly offer peace to Israel on any terms.  That is why the status quo is the only viable option for Israel and the Palestinians for the foreseeable future.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> The now called Palestinians, can sit at a table as they were supposed to since the Oslo Accords, and negotiate with Israel.


There is nothing to negotiate. Israel wants the Palestinians to negotiate away their inalienable rights. Inalienable rights are not negotiable. Any treaty or agreement that violates the rights of the people is invalid.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Please explain how Jordan had any right to any more parts of the Mandate.  Where were the Hashemites mentioned in the Mandate for Palestine of 1920?

Also explain, what right Egypt had to any part of the Mandate for Palestine after the UN Partition and the Declaration of Independence by Israel?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



What rights to TransJordan (78% of the Mandate for Palestine as the Homeland for the Jewish People )did the Hashemite clan have to begin with in 1925 that they ended up with the amount of land given them by the British?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > The now called Palestinians, can sit at a table as they were supposed to since the Oslo Accords, and negotiate with Israel.
> ...


The only "right" Israel wants the Palestinians to give up is the "right" to murder Jews, and you and they clearly believe that is an unreasonable demand.


----------



## danielpalos (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Palestine is not generating enough revenue; they need a Dey.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Jordan invaded, conquered the land in a war.
> ...



But they did win land from Jordan. You say it was not Jordan’s land to lose? Tell us please who Israel was at war with? If Jordan still had control over the W. Bank and E. Jerusalem would not be hearing about “ occupation”


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > The now called Palestinians, can sit at a table as they were supposed to since the Oslo Accords, and negotiate with Israel.
> ...



 That “ All or nothing” Mentality so they get nothing. The Palestinians know ahead of time that Israel isn’t going to give in to all demands.  

 If


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


lol  Well, if we want to go that route, what right did the League of Nations and then the UN have to any of the land, which had been captured from the Ottoman Empire?  However, if we don't question the legitimacy of the Mandate, then when the UN dissolved it, as it did in the Partition resolution, no one had any special right to that land and so Jordan had as much right to it as anyone else.


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2018)

Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_

This is very faulty logic. 

The use of "colonialism" in this case only demonstrates your lack of understanding of the claims, the environment, and the ties of the settlers to the colonial power.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > OH, that is ridiculous. You cannot use "Occupation" as a rule. US Forces were in both Korea and Europe for as long. As a matter of fact, they are still there. The presence of foreign troops does not preclude development.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Even so, the presense of the settlers does not mean that an adverse effect on the economy is inevitable.

It is the childish confrontation by the Arab Palestinians that create the economic pressures that further demonstrate that the Arab Palestinians cannot form a working government that can induce trade and stand alone within the meaning of Article 22.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2018)

Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,
_
This is Subterfuge, Disinformation, and Propaganda.  Changing the name of the instrumentality _(Border Police 'v' IDF)_ taking all the measures in his power to restore/maintain and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, ✪⇒ changes the character of the public order and safety being maintained under Article 43. 



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > BUT the wearing of body armor does not grant the perpetrator special permission or right to assault a police officer
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

No matter the source of maintenance, "public order and safety" is still "public order and safety;" whether it is administered by an Angel or a Demon.

Attacking the police is a demonstrated lack of respect for the public order and safety for the entire community.

And it defenatelyshow that the parental guidance needs much to be desired. 

Most Resepctfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Remember, before the first intifada/Oslo the borders were virtually open.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> It was Mandate for Palestine land,


The Mandate was merely a trustee. It had no land.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> This is very faulty logic.
> ...


From what do yo base your assertions?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety,


Stealing land and killing people is ensuring public order and safety?


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Your route is to rewrite the Mandates, all of them, and rewrite history.

Noted.

If the Allied victorious forces of WWI did not have any rights to any and all of the Ottoman Empire, than none of the other three Mandates are valid.

Goodbye Iraq

Goodbye  Syria

Goodbye Lebanon


Now we can go back to the topic of this thread about the Arab Palestinians  needing to move on and accept a Peace treaty with Israel in this day and age.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


The land was passed to the inhabitants of those lands including Palestine.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > It was Mandate for Palestine land,
> ...


As I said before, if the Mandate for Palestine had no validity, neither had the ones for Iraq, Lebanon and Syria.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Too bad Arafat did not have the brains NOT TO start the intifadas and that way putting an end for the people in Gaza having good jobs in Israel, and education, etc.

They are on their own now, except for the health care which Israel will still allow.

That is what happens to those who chose war.


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_

You keep throwing that out there to sidetrack the question at hand and the issue under discussion.



P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > It was Mandate for Palestine land,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

When people use the term "Mandate" as has been done in this case, they mean the _"territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied"_ as given its meaning by the Palestine Order in Council.

Don't sidetrack the issue.

The _"territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied"_ was derived from the agreements between the Allied Powers as was passed-on by Part I (Territories) Article 16 of the Treaty of Lausanne.  There was no obligation to, agreement with, or negotiation with Arab Palestinians; they were not a party to the Treaty. 

And to get technical, the "Mandate" was an official commission.  In those days the Mandatory would be what we would call today, the Agent with the obligation.  A "trustee" is the agency given the obligation to holds property, authority, or a position of trust and responsibility for the benefit of the Allied Powers. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Which includes the indigenous Jewish People/Nation of the land of Israel, aka, Palestine who were living in it, and even those who were not at the time living on it.
Why?  Because they are the Indigenous people and they legally won the right to recreate their sovereign nation.


But you refuse to recognize them as such, and refuse to recognize what happens when a Power loses a war, in this case - the Ottomans.

You do not like it, tough.
You do not accept it, tough.

Israel is not going anywhere, not now and not ever again.

The Arab "Palestinians" will get used to it if only their leaders stop teaching them hatred and only Muslim Power over the Jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> And to get technical, the "Mandate" was an official commission. In those days the Mandatory would be what we would call today, the Agent with the obligation. A "trustee" is the agency given the obligation to holds property, authority, or a position of trust and responsibility for the benefit of the Allied Powers.


The land was held in trust for the benefit of the inhabitants. That would be the citizens of that Territory.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > And to get technical, the "Mandate" was an official commission. In those days the Mandatory would be what we would call today, the Agent with the obligation. A "trustee" is the agency given the obligation to holds property, authority, or a position of trust and responsibility for the benefit of the Allied Powers.
> ...


And that is exactly what happened.

By 1937 the British decided to Partition between the two groups of people on the land.

The indigenous Jews and the Arabs who were living there.
The Jews agreed, the Arabs rejected it.

You keep making issues where there are none.

In 1947, the Arabs rejected it again.

End of story.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



In 1967 the Arabs rejected it again,
End of story.


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_

The assertions!

First → The use of the term "colonialism" is derived from the General Assembly monitoring the implementation of the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly A/RES/15/1514 (XV) Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples 14 December 1960.  The Special UN Committee on "Decolonization" annually review those areas in the world that might be in a colonial situation --- or --- what is technically called "Non-Self-Governing Territory (NSGT).  There is no territory in the entire Middle East that meets that criteria for which the "Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples" applies. 




​


P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Don't tell me that with all the Donor Nation needs the Arab Palestinians claim, that you are going to argue that they can, in any possible way, be considered a territory that can stand alone.  Hell, they can't even decide who is the ruling party, let alone even come close to operating under the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States.

Remember, it has been a long time since a nation has claimed it has the right to storm the borders of another nation.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2018)

Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,
_
The terms of the trusteeship determine the requirements.  Your statement is well over simplified.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > And to get technical, the "Mandate" was an official commission. In those days the Mandatory would be what we would call today, the Agent with the obligation. A "trustee" is the agency given the obligation to holds property, authority, or a position of trust and responsibility for the benefit of the Allied Powers.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Mandate to the British was agreed upon by the Allied Powers.

The Mandate _(in the name of the Allied Powers)_ did not communicate to the inhabitants a promise or obligation.   

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Exactly, all these countries were held in belligerent occupation by the League of Nations, which was just a tool by which Britain and France occupied the ME.  In fact, go back two thousand years or longer and nearly all of the ME was held in belligerent occupation by one power or another continuously right down  to the Ottomans.  All of these League of Nations Mandates were just tools by which the Ottoman occupation of the ME was turned into the British and French occupations of the ME.   

Belligerent occupation simply means captured in war, and when the UN was forced  to dissolve the Mandate after the British decided it was no longer profitable to hold on to it, despite the recommendations made in the Partition resolution, the land belonged to no one but everyone laid claim to it.  Egypt, Syria, Jordan and even Iraq all laid claim to it, and of course, the new state of Israel did, too, but the issue would be decided by force of arms among the peoples there and not by diplomats from far away places, and that is how it should be because there is no entity on Earth that can legitimately claim to have the authority to decide these issues.  

When the war ended all the land was held in belligerent occupation, including Israel, since it was all acquired in war, but over time, the nations in the region began to determine the legitimacy of ownership as did Egypt and Israel and Jordan and Israel, and the rest of the land is still held by force of arms until some settlement can be reached with the other Arab nations.  The only difference between lands held in belligerent occupation and those considered legitimate is that in the latter, the wars of occupation are more ancient.  

To get back to the Jordanian capture of Judea and Samaria, when the Mandate was dissolved, in terms of modern history,  no one had a greater claim to it than anyone else and Jordan's capture of it, painful though it was, was no more legitimate or illegitimate than Israel's capture of it would have been, and Israel's capture of that land years later was similarly neither legitimate nor illegitimate since these issues are never resolved by international law or by any international organization, but always only by the parties to the dispute.  We do not live in a world of laws, we live in a world of myths about a world of laws, and matters continue to be resolved as they always have been by the nations involved agreeing to what they believe what best serves their interests, as was the case between Egypt and Israel and Jordan and Israel.

As for the Palestinians role in all of this, they have none.  For thousands of years no one saw them as a distinct people with any rights at all, and if Israel were a Muslim state or a Christian state, no one would notice them today.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


In 1924 the Palestinians became the citizens of Palestine. This gave them the rights to the land.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


You are taking over the thread again, to discuss 100 years ago

Discuss the tittle of the thread:

saudi-prince-maybe-the-palestinians-shouldve-taken-the-deals-they-were-offered


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


I was just responding to a stupid post.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Bullshit, there was no nation of Palestine in 1924.


----------



## Hollie (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...



That’s the same, tired cut and paste meme you dump in most every thread. Really, sweetie, aren’t you the least bit embarrassed at your cut and paste slogans being thoroughly refuted?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


No, you were just responding stupidly.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Link?

Of course not. You are just shoveling Israeli shit.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You make a false statement and then demand a link to show it is false?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Indeed, and you are still arguing against actual documents.

Zionist mentality.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


I want a link for you to prove your bullshit to be true.

If you can't prove it, don't say it.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


It was your bullshit I was objecting to.


----------



## Hollie (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Of course, dear.

Indeed, I’m not arguing against “actual documents” that exist only as a part of your conspiracy theories.


----------



## Shusha (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > The now called Palestinians, can sit at a table as they were supposed to since the Oslo Accords, and negotiate with Israel.
> ...



Then why aren't the Arab Palestinians at war with Jordan to regain that lost territory?  How did their inalienable rights to Jordan (part of Palestine) get lost?


----------



## Slyhunter (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


But it was your statement that was false. When presenting a link use one from a non-Muslim biased source.


----------



## RoccoR (May 8, 2018)

RE  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  P F Tinmore, toomuchtime_, et al,

Neither the Palestine Order in Council, the Palestine Citizenship Order, or the Palestine Election Order granted any control over the Government of Palestine.  The Government of Palestine was in the hands of the British High Commissioner.



P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*




 
Copy Right:  Government Of Palestine 1924 Early & Rare Emergency Laissez Passer​
Our Friend "P F Tinmore" really believes that there is this huge conspiracy to ignore Palestinian Citizenship, the nation, and the sovereignty to the territory.  But you will be hard pressed to convience him that the citizenship to Palestine in 1924 did not relate to an autonomous government.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...


Oh, you're gonna give it up alright.  You're gonna give it up, like you did Gaza strip.

As far as passage between the WB and Gaza, I have to agree with you there.  That _is_ Israeli land and jurisdiction.  It's mean, but its legal.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

admonit said:


> Cannot demand what you never have.
> 
> I'm sure you can provide your land ownership certificate.


Sure.  It's called UN Resolution 242.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> I agree.  Palestinians do not occupy Israeli land.  But for the same reasons Israel does not occupy Palestinian land.  Why?  Because it is yet to be determined what IS Israeli land and what IS Palestinian land. The negotiation and peace treaty has not yet occurred.  The territory is disputed.
> 
> We also agree that by convention, if not by formal treaty, there is a definitive, undisputed (international) boundary between Israel and Gaza, yes?  So what gives Gazan, especially hostile Gazans, the right to cross an international boundary into territory which is NOT THEIRS?  And what removes Israel's right to defend her sovereignty at that boundary?


It is not a disputed territory.  It is clear, Israel has no sovereign title to that land.  It wasn't given to Zionists in the Mandate, so they took it in the '67 war.  You cannot hold onto land seized in a war.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Not true.  You have introduced arguments from the 1948 war, from 1945 and from the pre-Mandate period.  But, still, I appreciate your clarity.  Any further presentation, by you, of arguments from times other than 1967 can be dismissed as being inconsistent with your own claim.
> 
> However, given that Israel HAD sovereign title, in law, to the territory in its entirety; and given that the conflict between 1948 and 1967 and right up to 1988 when Palestine declared independence, was between Israel and the States of Jordan and Egypt and has since been resolved; and given that there is no possible legal claim for an existing international boundary (other than Oslo) your claim is without merit.


You are taking me out of context.  Show me the post you are referring to and I'll comment on them.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Unlike Palestine, the people who lived there are still living there.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Aren't you one of those who insist that Gazans and Palestinians have access to lethal weapons in order to 'defend themselves'?  I'm smelling the rank and nasty odor of double standards here.
> 
> Objectively, do people have the right to use lethal force to defend themselves or their territory?  Yes or no?
> 
> ...


There is a big difference between self defense and murder.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> I assure you, having just lived there for three weeks, Israel most certainly does have it.  Why shouldn't it be Israeli property?  Its a Jewish Holy Place, in an ancient Jewish city, on land going back nearly 4000 years in Jewish history.  Why shouldn't it be Israeli property?


Because you took it in the '67 war and you can't hold onto land seized in a war.  How many times do I have to tell you this?  You're in violation of international law.  

Do you know, one of the reasons IHL was created, was to prevent another Holocaust.  So every time you thumb your nose at IHL, you are virtually shitting on all the victims of the Holocaust and making their deaths to be in vain.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ Billo_Really, _et al,_
> 
> Question?  Does Israel say that the Arab Palestinians cannot leave the West Bank?  OR Does Israel say that the Arab Palestinians cannot enter Israel?
> ...


Some?  You are collectively punishing the entire population and that is a war crime.  You're building structures on land you don't own.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  P F Tinmore, toomuchtime_, et al,
> 
> Neither the Palestine Order in Council, the Palestine Citizenship Order, or the Palestine Election Order granted any control over the Government of Palestine.  The Government of Palestine was in the hands of the British High Commissioner.
> ...


Indeed, the change was with the Treaty of Lausanne.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ Billo_Really, et al,
> 
> This is just too funny.
> ...


An occupational force cannot claim self defense.  End the occupation and you won't need "counter measures".


----------



## Billo_Really (May 8, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Too bad Arafat did not have the brains NOT TO start the intifadas and that way putting an end for the people in Gaza having good jobs in Israel, and education, etc.
> 
> They are on their own now, except for the health care which Israel will still allow.
> 
> That is what happens to those who chose war.


According to the Red Cross and Physicians without borders, there is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza.


----------



## Hollie (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Too bad Arafat did not have the brains NOT TO start the intifadas and that way putting an end for the people in Gaza having good jobs in Israel, and education, etc.
> ...



That’s some “crisis” which has you weepy-eyed. 


Hamas second-richest terror group in world, Forbes says


----------



## Markle (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > Hitler lost.
> ...



Perfectly defining your logic.  To you, winning and losing a war is the same thing.  Thank you!


----------



## Markle (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Too bad Arafat did not have the brains NOT TO start the intifadas and that way putting an end for the people in Gaza having good jobs in Israel, and education, etc.
> ...



Brought on by their elected terrorist government, Hamas.  Thank you again!


----------



## Markle (May 8, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Look, the whole point I am trying to argue here is that there is nothing "magical" about the "1967 lines".  There is no point in arguing for a return to some "magical" point in time.
> 
> Israel (And I really mean Jews here) needs peace and security.  Arab Palesinians need self-determination and a future.  It makes no difference where the boundary ultimately ends up as long as both those things can be brought into being.



Oreally would argue with you and call you filthy names if any Conservative posted that the sun rises in the East.  He's a simple troll.


----------



## Markle (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Israelis used to vacation in Gaza. It was Israel who slammed the door.



Yes, sending suicide bombers, rockets, mortars and more tends to do that.


----------



## Markle (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> There is nothing to negotiate. Israel wants the Palestinians to negotiate away their inalienable rights. Inalienable rights are not negotiable. Any treaty or agreement that violates the rights of the people is invalid.



Would you be so kind as to show us where swearing genocide against any group is an inalienable right?

If you cannot, then there is nothing more to be added to this foolish thread is there?


----------



## Markle (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> In 1924 the Palestinians became the citizens of Palestine. This gave them the rights to the land.



Which has exactly what to do with 100 years later?


----------



## Markle (May 8, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Because you took it in the '67 war and you can't hold onto land seized in a war.



On what planet is that the case?

Has Russia not taken Crimea?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 8, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...


Bullshit, the treaty had nothing to do with the so called Palestinians who were not even recognized as a people by any of the parties to the treaty at that time.  Why do you feel the need to lie so much?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

Hollie said:


> That’s some “crisis” which has you weepy-eyed.
> 
> 
> Hamas second-richest terror group in world, Forbes says


They don't get as much as Israel gets from the US.  And they're a state-sponsored terrorist group.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

Markle said:


> Perfectly defining your logic.  To you, winning and losing a war is the same thing.  Thank you!


That's not what I said.  Why do you lie?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

Markle said:


> Brought on by their elected terrorist government, Hamas.  Thank you again!


Wrong!  Brought on by ISRAEL'S DECISION to collectively punish the entire population of Gaza, because ISRAEL didn't like the results of a fair and democratic election.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

Markle said:


> On what planet is that the case?
> 
> Has Russia not taken Crimea?


You need to do your homework before you open your mouth and look like an idiot.

_*The Fourth Geneva Convention*
The applicability of the fourth Geneva Convention to "all the territories occupied by Israel in 1967" is held with "a remarkable degree of unanimity" among international actors. 

In a 2004 advisory opinion to the UN General Assembly, the International Court of Justice stated that *Article 2 of the Convention applied to the case of Israel's presence in the territories captured during the 1967 war*. 

It stated that Article 2 applies if there exists an armed conflict between two contracting parties,* regardless of the territories' status in international law prior to the armed attack*. 

It also argued that *"no territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal"* according to customary international law and defined by "Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations" (General Assembly Resolution 2625).
_​It is also worth noting...

_At present, based on the result of numerous UN resolutions that cite Article 49 of the Geneva Convention, the consensus view of the international community is that Israeli settlements are illegal and constitute a violation of international law. According to the BBC, *every government in the world, except Israel, considers the settlements to be illegal.*_​


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > I agree.  Palestinians do not occupy Israeli land.  But for the same reasons Israel does not occupy Palestinian land.  Why?  Because it is yet to be determined what IS Israeli land and what IS Palestinian land. The negotiation and peace treaty has not yet occurred.  The territory is disputed.
> ...



It wasn't given to Israel in the Mandate?  Again, I have to ask, have you read the Mandate?  Which Article in the Mandate (1922) creates an international border along the Green Line which didn't exist until 1949?  

Astonishing. How did they do that? Did they time travel?  Of did they have the gift of prophecy?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Markle said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Ooooo, terrorists. Is name calling all you got?


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Aren't you one of those who insist that Gazans and Palestinians have access to lethal weapons in order to 'defend themselves'?  I'm smelling the rank and nasty odor of double standards here.
> ...



Sure. We agree. But the difference for you seems to be Jooooos. 

You agree that using force, including lethal force, is permissible in order to defend yourself, your citizens and your territory, yes?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> It wasn't given to Israel in the Mandate?  Again, I have to ask, have you read the Mandate?  Which Article in the Mandate (1922) creates an international border along the Green Line which didn't exist until 1949?
> 
> Astonishing. How did they do that? Did they time travel?  Of did they have the gift of prophecy?


Susha, my dear, how are you finding yourself this evening?  Are you able to afford the cost of Milky?

Yes, I've read the Mandate.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > It wasn't given to Israel in the Mandate?  Again, I have to ask, have you read the Mandate?  Which Article in the Mandate (1922) creates an international border along the Green Line which didn't exist until 1949?
> ...



Then you should have no trouble answering my question.

Where in the 1922 Mandate is the territory divided into two territories along the 1949 Green Line?


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Sure. We agree. But the difference for you seems to be Jooooos.
> 
> You agree that using force, including lethal force, is permissible in order to defend yourself, your citizens and your territory, yes?


First off, I asked you before, "why would I hate Jews?", and you have not given me an answer.  If you are going to continue to make such a baseless accusation, I think I am _owed_ an answer.

Secondly, I agree with your last statement.  Except, an occupational force cannot claim self defense.  That would be the equivalent of an assassin telling the cops, he had no choice but to shoot his target to death, after breaking into the house, and finding the home owner put up more resistance than anticipated and that he [the assassin], was in fear for his life.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Then you should have no trouble answering my question.
> 
> Where in the 1922 Mandate is the territory divided into two territories along the 1949 Green Line?


Why do you deliberately try to gin up the question in order to make sure you get an answer more to your liking?  

The Mandate called for two states.  One Jewish.  One Arab.  However, the Jewish state came with a caveat.  Zionists may create the State of Israel, provided it did not prejudice in any way, the religious rights of the non-Jewish population in the area.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Sure. We agree. But the difference for you seems to be Jooooos.
> ...



An occupational force is not permitted to defend itself and its citizens even on its own territory?  

You are arguing then, by international law, Israel is prohibited from responding to any attacks against it or its citizens?  

So Gazans are permitted by law to march to Jerusalem tearing the hearts out of Jews and Israel is prohibited from responding or defending her citizens?

Ridiculous.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > On what planet is that the case?
> ...


 
Yawn...,. Who gives a Shit? If Israel had lost the ‘67 War you would not be quoting the Geneva Convention.   FUCK YOU !!!’


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> An occupational force is not permitted to defend itself and its citizens even on its own territory?
> 
> You are arguing then, by international law, Israel is prohibited from responding to any attacks against it or its citizens?
> 
> ...


On its own territory, yes.  On territory it has no sovereign title to, no.


----------



## Billo_Really (May 9, 2018)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Yawn...,. Who gives a Shit? If Israel had lost the ‘67 War you would not be quoting the Geneva Convention.   FUCK YOU !!!’


Yes I would.  Nice to see you and Hitler think the same way.  Might makes right!

This will be my last post in this thread.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Then you should have no trouble answering my question.
> ...


*The Palestine Mandate*

*The Council of the League of Nations:*

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty,* and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,* it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country


----------*
1922 did not mention the Arabs as getting their own State in the Mandate

That only happened in 1937, the first time the British offered to Partition the rest of the Mandate (minus the 78% already given to the Arab Hashemites) into a Jewish and an Arab State.

Why?

Because since 1920, the Arabs did nothing but attack the Jews and have them expelled from their homes in Gaza, Hebron and other places. (Including TransJordan in 1925)

Right, only the religious rights of the Jewish people were to
have nothing but prejudice against them, as shown by the Arabs again and again.

Guess who got kicked out of their oldest city in Hebron?

Guess who got kicked out of their most religious place in 1948 and not allowed to see or pray there until 1967?


Sprinkle us with some more of your knowledge about the issue.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Then you should have no trouble answering my question.
> ...



1.  It didn't. 

2.  The caveat also applied to the treatment of Jews, who were actually denied their rights. 

3.  Your claim was that the Mandate for the Jewish State did not give all the territory to the Jewish State.  Your claim is that there was an international boundary written into the Mandate. It's a patently ridiculous claim.  And you know it.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Yawn...,. Who gives a Shit? If Israel had lost the ‘67 War you would not be quoting the Geneva Convention.   FUCK YOU !!!’
> ...


The Catholic Irish who keeps borrowing from Martin Luther and Hitler, acts insulted that Jews dare to defend themselves.

That is a good one


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > An occupational force is not permitted to defend itself and its citizens even on its own territory?
> ...




Thank you!  Israel has every right to use force, including lethal force, against those attempting to cross the border into Israel.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...




Still not allowed to pray there.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


Yes, I know.  But gratefully, there have been some exceptions.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> That only happened in 1937, the first time the British offered to Partition the rest of the Mandate


They couldn't partition the "Mandate" because the Mandate was an administration not a place.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> 3. Your claim was that the Mandate for the Jewish State did not give all the territory to the Jewish State.


The Mandate had no territory to give.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > 3. Your claim was that the Mandate for the Jewish State did not give all the territory to the Jewish State.
> ...


Only in your mind.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > 3. Your claim was that the Mandate for the Jewish State did not give all the territory to the Jewish State.
> ...


Always, only in your mind.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Its true. Look it up.

Of course you won't. Zionists prefer to stay stupid.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


I have the Mandate right in front of me.

You find the article which says that in 1922 the whole Mandate for Palestine, including TransJordan was not to become the the homeland, again, for the Jewish People.

WHAT other people were included in that Mandate in 1922?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


The people who lived there.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


What people?

And where in the Mandate that it says that there is going to be a separate State in the Mandate for any of them, in 1922?

Read it, before you answer.

The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Read it before you question. The Mandate was not a land deal.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You are done here.

The Mandate for Palestine was not a "land deal" ?

Then neither were :

Lebanon

Syria 

Iraq


Make sure you tell the UN that none of those Mandates have ever been valid.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Perfectly defining your logic.  To you, winning and losing a war is the same thing.  Thank you!
> ...


Comparing Israel gain of land when they won their war to Hitlers loss of land when he lost his war is the saying just that.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Of course you do not understand it. That is no surprise. Israeli bullshit says that the Mandate was Palestine.

Matz, 2005, p.70-71, "Primarily, two elements formed the core of the Mandate System, *the principle of non-annexation of the territory *on the one hand and its administration as a “sacred trust of civilisation” on the other... The principle of administration as a “sacred trust of civilisation” was designed to prevent a practice of imperial exploitation of the mandated territory in contrast to former colonial habits. Instead, *the Mandatory’s administration should assist in developing the territory for the well-being of its native people."*

League of Nations mandate - Wikipedia​


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Yawn...,. Who gives a Shit? If Israel had lost the ‘67 War you would not be quoting the Geneva Convention.   FUCK YOU !!!’
> ...



Your last post? GOD is good!!!!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 9, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...



That’s not even the point. Hitler initiated the War; that’s the difference. That dumb FUCK doesn’t have the intelligence to understand it


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



It seems your wiki’fied version of rather odd reinvention of history has a root cause. 


who can edit wikipedia - Google Search

“Anyone with Internet access *can* write and make changes to *Wikipedia* articles, except in limited cases where *editing* is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism. Users *can* contribute anonymously, under a pseudonym, or, if they choose to, with their real identity.”


----------



## admonit (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> > Cannot demand what you never have.
> ...


Now quote me please the name of the "owner" from this useless document.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Lame attempt at deflection.

League of Nations mandate - Wikipedia

You can't edit source material.


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Anything can be edited on wiki. This is just more of your usual practice of spamming threads with off-topic cut and paste whining about the history that causes you such Islamo-angst.

Do you realize that your shrill screeching causes all the dogs in my neighborhood to start barking.


----------



## AsherN (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > First it is a fence, and again you show you have no idea what you are arguing about.  Second, attacking the fence is an attack on Israel because the fence prevents Palestinian terrorists from attacking Israeli civilians.
> ...



That makes up less than 4% of the fence. And is erected in areas susceptible to sniper.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (May 9, 2018)

AsherN said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


In fact, that's not even the Gaza fence, it's the fence along the green line.


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, _et al,_

Some _(and only some)_ of your commentary here is based on → or in accordance with → reason.  Some of this commentary has been overtaken by events or based on the assumption that other authorities are correct --- when they are in fact, seriously flawed. 



Billo_Really said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> > Cannot demand what you never have.
> ...


*(REFERENCES and ANNEXES)*

•  The Arab-Israeli Conflict known as the "Six Day War" extended over the period 5 June until 10 June 10th 1967.
_•  Resolution S/RES/242  22 November 1967 Emphasized:  _The inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security.
•  According to the George A. Brown, British Foreign Secretary and one of the authors, said he showed the Security Council, and Arab leaders the proposal said which was written such that → ‘Israel will withdraw from territories that were occupied,’ and not from ‘the’ territories, which means that Israel will not withdraw from all the territories.”

✪⇒  Annexes to Commentary:

Annex I:  Maps Delineation Armistice Lines for the West Bank _Palestine (North & South sheets), Jerusalem, Latrun_
Annex II:  General Armistice - Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and Israel - Rhodes, 3 April 1949
Annex III:  Map outlining the general areas known as the Occupied Territories Map 3243 Rev 4 UN 1967 → Territories Occupied by Israel since 1967.​
*(COMMENT)*

According to the George A. Brown, British Foreign Secretary, _(at the time of the composition)_ and one of the authors, said he showed the Security Council, and Arab leaders the proposal said which was written such that → "Israel will withdraw from territories that were occupied,’ and not from ‘the’ territories, which means that *Israel will not withdraw from all the territories*.”   Similarly, Lord Caradon _(Hugh Mackintosh Foot)_, Permanent Representative of the UK to UN, said:  "They were just armistice lines. That's why we didn't demand that the Israelis return to them and I think we were right not to ..."

The intent of Resolution 242 "called ‘secure and recognized’ boundaries, agreed to by the parties. In negotiating such agreements, the parties should take into account, among other factors, security considerations, access to the international waterways of the region, and, of course, their respective legal claims.” _(Eugene Rostow Undersecretary of State for Political Affair)_

The Arab Palestinians are NOT mentioned anywhere in Resolution 242.  Resolution 242 DOES NOT require that Israel give the Arab Palestinians any political rights or territory.



Billo_Really said:


> Some?  You are collectively punishing the entire population and that is a war crime.  You're building structures on land you don't own.


*(COMMENT)*

The imposition of restrictions placed upon the entity --- or  --- unilateral actions taken by Israel against the Palestinian entity for political or security reasons,  is no more a case of "collective punishment" than any multilateral sanction the international community or regional alliances places upon belligerent nations anywhere else.



Billo_Really said:


> You need to do your homework before you open your mouth and look like an idiot.
> 
> _*The Fourth Geneva Convention*
> The applicability of the fourth Geneva Convention to "all the territories occupied by Israel in 1967" is held with "a remarkable degree of unanimity" among international actors.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, this is all Article 2 related concepts, that apply equally to the protection and security of the state of Israel from Arab Palestinian elements attempting to topple the Israeli Government.  And it is one-sided.  It does not mention that Article 51 allows for the Israeli Defense against Arab Palestinian attacks.  Nor does this one-sided commentary allow for the view that Israel has territorial integrity or political independence.  Nor does the commentary points out that Arab Palestinian has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of Israel  --- or --- using threats or use of force as a means of solving international disputes, _including territorial disputes_ and problems concerning frontiers of States.

The Arab Palestinian should be seeking settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.  BUT --- what we actually see is the Arab Palestinian intentionally creating conditions with preventing meaningful meeting towards peace. 



Billo_Really said:


> It is also worth noting...
> 
> _At present, based on the result of numerous UN resolutions that cite Article 49 of the Geneva Convention, the consensus view of the international community is that Israeli settlements are illegal and constitute a violation of international law. According to the BBC, *every government in the world, except Israel, considers the settlements to be illegal.*_​


*(COMMENT)*

In 1967, the Israelis DID NOT occupy any Palestinian territory.  It engaged two nations that either threatened to use force, or actually did use force, that provoked a military response.  

•  In 1979, Egypt, NOT the Arab Palestinians, established peace with Israelis.
•  In 1994, Jordan, NOT the Arab Palestinians, established peace with the Israelis.​
You will note that the treaty with Egypt included the Gaza Strip; just as the treaty with Jordan included the West Bank.  These two treaty dissolved the Armistice Lines.

Most Respectfully.
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ Billo_Really, _et al,_
> 
> Some _(and only some)_ of your commentary here is based on → or in accordance with → reason.  Some of this commentary has been overtaken by events or based on the assumption that other authorities are correct --- when they are in fact, seriously flawed.
> ...





RoccoR said:


> You will note that the treaty with Egypt included the Gaza Strip; just as the treaty with Jordan included the West Bank. These two treaty dissolved the Armistice Lines.


Then why do you see them on every map of Israel?


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...




Fascinating question. Given that you agree there is no international border within Israel/Palestine -- what is your answer to the question?

Why has the international community adopted a false border?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Because everybody has heard Israeli bullshit a gazillion times since birth. So virtually nobody questions it.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...




I agree not enough people question it.

I'm not sure how you come to understand that it is "Israeli bullshit".  Why would Israel create a false border?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


That is the only way to put Israel on the map. All territory has to have a border. Israel has no territory so they have to make up borders.


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



All the same slogans you litter across multiple threads. 

Your conspiracy theories are a hoot.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


You asked the question. What would your answer be?


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



What question?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 9, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> Daryl Hunt said:
> 
> 
> > Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should've taken the deals they were offered
> ...



you took all the paid Israel trolls here to school that have penetrated this site.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





Shusha said:


> Why would Israel create a false border?


That question.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...




Hmmmm. Israel has a border with Jordan. One with Egypt. One with Syria. And one with Lebanon. 

Why would she create a fake border within Israel?  And how does it serve her?  Given Billo_Really 's all too common, if mistaken, belief that this fake border creates "Palestinian land"?

It makes no sense.


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


I didn’t ask that question. 

It appeared to be a rhetorical question aimed at allowing you an opportunity to launch yourself into another of your Jew hating rants allowing yourself a host of excuse for Arab-Moslem ineptitude and incompetence. 

............ <——— this is where you will be expected to launch into a tirade of your usual cut and paste slogans, cliches and PressTV YouTube videos.


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ Billo_Really, _et al,_

The term of the Armistice Lines was defined by the Armistice Agreement.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > You will note that the treaty with Egypt included the Gaza Strip; just as the treaty with Jordan included the West Bank. These two treaty dissolved the Armistice Lines.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

√  Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement (1949)  S/1302/Rev.1  3 April 1949

*Article XII*​
1. The present Agreement is not subject to ratification and shall come into force immediately upon being signed.

 2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this article.

 3. The Parties to this Agreement may, by mutual consent, revise this Agreement or any of its provisions, or may suspend its application, other than articles I and III, at any time. In the absence of mutual agreement and after this Agreement has been in effect for one year from the date of its signing, either of the Parties may call upon the Secretary-General of the United Nations to convoke a conference of representatives of the two Parties for the purpose of reviewing, revising, or suspending any of the provisions of this Agreement other than articles I and III. Participation in such conference shall be obligatory upon the Parties.​
√  Armistice Egyptian-Israel  S/1264/Corr.1 of 23 February 1949

*Article XII*​
1. The present Agreement is not subject to ratification and shall come into force immediately upon being signed.

2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an Armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.

3. The Parties to this Agreement may, by mutual consent, revise this Agreement or any of its provisions, or may suspend its application, other than Articles I and II, at any time. In the absence of mutual agreement and after this Agreement has been effect for one year from the date of its signing, either of the Parties may call upon the Secretary-General of the United Nations to convoke a conference of representatives of the two Parties for the purpose of reviewing, revising or suspending any of the provisions of this Agreement other than Articles I and II. Participation in such conference shall be obligatory upon the Parties.​
As you can see, the individual Armistice Agreements only remains valid until a Peace Treaty is concluded between the parties to each of the individual; agreements.

The Armistice Lines of 1949, between Israel and the two Arab Parties of Egypt and Jordan, have been resolved for decades and are only used for reference.  The new Permanent Boundaries between these parties are defined in the treaties.

√  The Jordan-Israeli Peace Treaty (1994) Official Jordanian Website

Article 3 - *International Boundary*
*Annex I (a)*
*Jordan-Israel International Boundary*
*Delimitation And Demarcation*
*SECTIONS*
*I  Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers*
*II Dead Sea and Salt Pans*
*III  Wadi Araba/Emek Ha’arava*
*IV  The Gulf of Aqaba
*​
1. *The international boundary between Jordan and Israel is* delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I (a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and coordinates specified therein.
2. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognized the international boundary between Jordan and Israel, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967. 

3. The Parties recognize the international boundary, as well as each other's territory, territorial waters, and airspace, as inviolable, and will respect and comply with them.

 4. The demarcation of the boundary will take place as set forth in Appendix (I) to Annex I and will be concluded not later than 9 months after the signing of the Treaty.​
√  Egypt-Israel peace treaty (26 March 1979) UN Registry
*Article II*​
*The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is* the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​
Most Res[ectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ Billo_Really, _et al,_
> 
> The term of the Armistice Lines was defined by the Armistice Agreement.
> ...





RoccoR said:


> √ Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement (1949) S/1302/Rev.1 3 April 1949



(d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) *to the southernmost tip of Palestine,* the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by existing military positions,...​


RoccoR said:


> √ Armistice Egyptian-Israel S/1264/Corr.1 of 23 February 1949



4. The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever *for the purpose of entering Palestine.*
​The UN called the southern part of the territory Palestine in two different agreements and Israel signed both.


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...



Yes. Palestine is a territory.

Bolded text won’t magically transform a territory into your invented
Magical Kingdom of Disney Pally’land


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Not true. Israel has armistice lines (fake borders) while Palestine has international borders.

*Article V​*​
1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine. 

The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949​


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Indeed, but it is Palestinian territory.


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Indeed, you do appear rather desperate with such nonsensical rants.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Yeah, like posting actual documents.

What do you have?


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Press TV YouTube videos are hardly actual documents.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> The term of the Armistice Lines was defined by the Armistice Agreement.


Indeed.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

S/1264/Corr.1 of 23 February 1949​


----------



## Hollie (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The term of the Armistice Lines was defined by the Armistice Agreement.
> ...



Indeed, your comment spectacularly failed because you missed timelines by decades.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Not true. Israel has armistice lines (fake borders) while Palestine has international borders.



Oh please. There are no more armistice lines between Israel and Jordan and Egypt.  They've all been dissolved with peace treaties.  Israel has treaties with Jordan and Egypt defining (actually confirming) the international borders between their nations.  Palestine has no treaties with anyone.  (Excepting Oslo).


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Not true. Israel has armistice lines (fake borders) while Palestine has international borders.
> ...


Palestine does not need any treaties. None of their borders are disputed.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


bullshit.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


So, where is the dispute?


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Once the Permanent Treaties are resolved and placed into effect, the Armistice Agreements desolve and are no longer an active or restrictive document.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

What the UN may call or participate in is unimportant.  Treaties are strictly between Israel and individual Egypt and Jordan.

All that matters is that the once waring parties understand the intent of the Peace Treaty.  Which they do.  They have been in effect for decades without being contested.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Slyhunter (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Israel disputes where the borders lie with Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Slyhunter said:
> ...


Palestine has borders. Israel doesn't. What is the dispute?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Once the Permanent Treaties are resolved and placed into effect, the Armistice Agreements desolve and are no longer an active or restrictive document.
> ...


Neither of them have authority over Palestine's borders.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> Once the Permanent Treaties are resolved and placed into effect, the Armistice Agreements desolve and are no longer an active or restrictive document.


So then, why does every map of Israel have defunct armistice lines?


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  et al,

Our friend "P F Tinmore has been trying to argue that the original boundaries of the former territory to which the Mandate Applied, is a permanent international boundary subject to change --- ONLY with the Aarab Palestinian approval.

When P F Tinmore says that Palestine already had permanent international boundaries, he means the entirely as described in the Palestinian National Charter; and which is sometimes described as the boundaries prior to the termination of the Mandate.

This would be entirely wrong, but you will never change his mind or the mind of the many many thousand that believe that to be the case.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Oddly enough, we agree.  The international borders are not in dispute.  They are as clear as any border in the world.

The dispute is over internal borders and the question of partition in order for BOTH peoples to have self-determination and sovereignty.  Its an internal civil conflict.  The solution is in negotiation and peaceful mutual recognition.  But Arabs don't seem to be able to cope with such a thing.

The truly weird thing about your argument is your complete denial in the existence of Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Once the Permanent Treaties are resolved and placed into effect, the Armistice Agreements desolve and are no longer an active or restrictive document.
> ...


Israel signed both of those agreements. Then Israel turns around and claims borders on that territory.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


The border between Israel and palestine is at dispute.


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

And that is what is going to break into a rift between Hostile Arab Palestinians, like yourself, and other members of the Arab League.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > What the UN may call or participate in is unimportant.  Treaties are strictly between Israel and individual Egypt and Jordan.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

This is just patently false. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> is a permanent international boundary subject to change --- ONLY with the Aarab Palestinian approval.


Where does it say it is not?

Link?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> And that is what is going to break into a rift between Hostile Arab Palestinians, like yourself, and other members of the Arab League.
> ...


Where does it say that foreign parties have authority over Palestine's borders?

Link?


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> Our friend "P F Tinmore has been trying to argue that the original boundaries of the former territory to which the Mandate Applied, is a permanent international boundary subject to change --- ONLY with the Aarab Palestinian approval.



Well, he is right.  International boundaries can and do change with mutual agreement between Parties.  So, effectively, the boundaries can only change with Arab Palestinian approval AND Israeli approval.  That is what the peace process is. 

The problem with Tinmore's argument is that he puts his fingers in his ears and pretends Israel doesn't exist.  Indeed, is not permitted to exist.


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The Armistice Lines are historical references; nothing more.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Once the Permanent Treaties are resolved and placed into effect, the Armistice Agreements desolve and are no longer an active or restrictive document.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

But the Armistice ended on the engagement of the Peace Treaties.  With the end of the Armistice, so went the Armistice Lines.

Most Resepctfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Slyhunter said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Slyhunter said:
> ...


There is no border between Israel and Palestine. There is no dispute.


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

This is such an invalid question.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > is a permanent international boundary subject to change --- ONLY with the Aarab Palestinian approval.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Arab Palestinians were not a party to the Armistice.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> Well, he is right. International boundaries can and do change with mutual agreement between Parties. So, effectively, the boundaries can only change with Arab Palestinian approval AND Israeli approval. That is what the peace process is.


Indeed.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> There is no border between Israel and Palestine. There is no dispute.



There is most certainly a conflict.  Two peoples vying for self-determination and sovereignty.  The solution, in every other case in recent history, is a partition with each peoples getting part of the territory.

But the Arab Palestinians refuse to accept that.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This is such an invalid question.
> ...


The armistice changed no borders.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > There is no border between Israel and Palestine. There is no dispute.
> ...


There is no requirement for Palestine to change or negotiate its borders.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> The Armistice Lines are historical references; nothing more.
> ...


That ducks my question.


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> There is no requirement for Palestine to change or negotiate its borders.



I disagree.  And so do you.  

Peoples have a right to self-determination and sovereignty over territory.  You are constantly arguing that.  Remember?  Inviolable human right.  Remember?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 9, 2018)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > There is no requirement for Palestine to change or negotiate its borders.
> ...


The UN reaffirms the Palestinians sovereign rights over their territory.

I don't recall seeing anything similar for the Israelis.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You're nuts.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



There is no requirement for Israel to accept Borders that were never accepted before or give up their religious Sites


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> The UN reaffirms the Palestinians sovereign rights over their territory.
> 
> I don't recall seeing anything similar for the Israelis.



Your memory is poor.  The predecessor to the UN confirmed the Jewish peoples absolute right to sovereignty over their ancestral territory by virtue of their historical claim. 

Inviolable rights.  Remember?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


 
The U.N. doesn’t affirm Israeli Sovereign Rights over their territory? Like I have said before; “ International Law” is a joke


----------



## Shusha (May 9, 2018)

P F Tinmore

Look.  Bottom line.  Been going on for nearly 100 years. 

Arabs have every right to their own self-determination and sovereignty.  They have absolutely no right to deny it to the indigenous Jewish peoples.


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Your just trying to confuse the issue.  I never said that Armistice Lines set borders, in fact, I consistently said the opposite.



P F Tinmore said:


> The armistice changed no borders.


*(COMMENT)*

But what does set the borders are the Peace Treaties.  And if the Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to the Armistice Agreement, then they were not a party to the Peace Treaty that match the Armistice Agreement.

AND, as a matter of fact, if you are a West Bank Palestinian, or anGazaStrip Palestinian, then neither the Armistice Lines, and the boundaries to the territory formerly subject to the Mandate, then All you should be concerned with today, are the existing treaties and any newly negotiated agreements. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Too funny.



P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

If the Arab Palestinians do not come to the table and negotiate the issues subject to the Permanent Status of Negotiations (Oslo Accords), then the status quo will probably be just fine with the Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

No, you just did not read the answer.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Armistice Lines (around the Gaza Strip and West Bank) are just for historical recreference.

Most maps don't have the Armistice Lines.  They show the current lines of control and sovereignty that look similar to Armistice Lines.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (May 9, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Here we go again.



P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Territorial Sovereignty is the right of a State to exercise over its own territory, to the exclusion of any other State.   Everyone, including the Arab Palestinians, understands were the territorial control _(territoial sovereignty to the exclusion of any other)_ of Israel is maintained.

THE QUESTION IS:  Where are the boundaries of Palestinian exclusive territorial control?  That would be the important piece of ground to the State of Palestine...

_NOTE:_

_And don't come back with that lame response that sovereignty belongs to the people.  Clearly that is not the case in many nations, to include a couple of Arab League States._​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 10, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Your just trying to confuse the issue.  I never said that Armistice Lines set borders, in fact, I consistently said the opposite.
> ...


Why? There have been no treaties changing Palestine's international borders.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 10, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Too funny.
> ...


Still there is no requirement for Palestine to change or negotiate its borders.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 10, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> No, you just did not read the answer.
> ...


Indeed, they separate 1948 occupied Palestine from 1967 occupied Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 10, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Here we go again.
> ...


You are still confusing territorial control (military occupation)
with the right to sovereignty.


----------



## Hollie (May 10, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...



Indeed, you are confused with terms and definitions.


----------



## RoccoR (May 10, 2018)

RE:  Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Palestine, as a nation, did not become a quasi-nation without borders until 1988.  



P F Tinmore said:


> Why? There have been no treaties changing Palestine's international borders.


*(COMMENT)*

Here, we have you demonstrating the Ostrich Effect.

There are (obviously) two sets of conditions which you fail to take into account:

•  You are mistaking Government in Palestine, subject to the provisions of the Mandate, as some Government under which the Arab Palestinian people had control.  While the territory to which the Mandate applied had boundaries, they were not permanent.  And the Government of Palestine was not everlasting.

•  The initial partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State _[alla Resolution 181 (II)]_ was interrupted and mutated as a result of the external interference by armed forces elements of the Arab League.  That confrontation did not alter any permanent boundaries, but artifically divided the territory, to which the Mandate once applied, into four elements _(simplified thumbnail descriptions)_:

■  The original 181(II) partition of the Jewish State.
■  The portion of the territory that was under the occupation by the Israelis.
■  The Jordanian Occupation of the West Bank and Jerusalem.
■  The Egyptian Occupation of the Gaza Strip.​
The establishment of the State of Palestine _(the State of Palestine shall be an Arab State)_ in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem in 1988 _(three decades past)_, was ambiguous at best.  At that time, there was no territory in which the Arab Palestinian people _[represented by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)]_ exercised its own authority and enforce territorial control, to the exclusion of either Isreal or one of the Arab League States.  It is at this point, one has to ask, what territory was the PLO declared → through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereign?

_(What territory was that?)_

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (May 10, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

No, I don't think you know what the territorial sovereignty means.



P F Tinmore said:


> You are still confusing territorial control (military occupation) with the right to sovereignty.


*(COMMENT)*

√  *State Territory and Territorial Sovereignty*:

•  Sovereignty in regard to a territory is known as territorial sovereignty.  Territorial Sovereignty is the right of a State to exercise over its own territory, to the exclusion of any other States, the functions of a State.

•  A State exercises its territorial sovereignty within its boundary.

•  Boundary is an imaginary line that delineates the territorial limit of a State.​
In order to exercise sovereignty over any given territory, there must be a certain measure of control; enough control to enforce the sovereignty.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 10, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> • Sovereignty in regard to a territory is known as territorial sovereignty. Territorial Sovereignty is the right of a State to exercise over its own territory, to the exclusion of any other States, the functions of a State.


Where is Israel's "own territory?"

Do you have a map without those fake border armistice lines?


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 10, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> No, I don't think you know what the territorial sovereignty means.
> ...





RoccoR said:


> In order to exercise sovereignty over any given territory, there must be a certain measure of control; enough control to enforce the sovereignty.


*Not!*

*ARTICLE 4*
States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.

The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933​
You keep confusing rights with military power.


----------



## Hollie (May 10, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > • Sovereignty in regard to a territory is known as territorial sovereignty. Territorial Sovereignty is the right of a State to exercise over its own territory, to the exclusion of any other States, the functions of a State.
> ...



Did you not understand anything from the description of State Territory and Territorial Sovereignty?


----------



## Hollie (May 10, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...



Indeed, you keep confusing the islamic terrorist mini-caliphates of Gaza and the West Bank with sovereign states, which they are not.


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 10, 2018)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Nice duck.


----------



## Hollie (May 10, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



You're typically waving the flag of retreat.


----------



## danielpalos (May 10, 2018)

A Deylicate of Palestine could include Israeli input on the Dey.


----------



## teddyearp (May 11, 2018)

Billo_Really said:


> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


Yeah, I used to live in North Town. 65th and Orange. Back when it was the '7' and not the '710'.

But, that's still not here nor there.


----------



## RoccoR (May 12, 2018)

RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Sorry.  I did not see this request until just now.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > • Sovereignty in regard to a territory is known as territorial sovereignty. Territorial Sovereignty is the right of a State to exercise over its own territory, to the exclusion of any other States, the functions of a State.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*





 ​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (May 12, 2018)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Sorry.  I did not see this request until just now.
> ...


So you post a map created by Israel.


----------



## Slyhunter (May 12, 2018)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Saudi prince: Maybe the Palestinians should’ve taken the deals they were offered
> ...


It's a good map and it shows why the West bank shouldn't even exist.


----------



## danielpalos (May 21, 2018)

Would the Israeli's object to a Deylicate of Palestine, being based in Jerusalem?

In my opinion, the situation in the region is delicate; a Deylicate is indicated.

Once accomplished, loyal subjects would have a Lord spiritual and temporal, upon whom to render all of their problems. 

Field Marshals make natural candidates, literally.

Besides, a Dey, should be able to go to any delicate region, and establish Order over Chaos.

And, a Dey may, command economize, any economy within the Deylicate.

full employment of resources is a reasonable goal.  along with unemployment compensation, simply for being unemployed; if Capitalism is subscribed to.


----------



## rylah (May 23, 2018)




----------



## danielpalos (May 23, 2018)

A lord spiritual and temporal, to take up all of their problems, that is what the People of Palestine, need.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 23, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> A lord spiritual and temporal, to take up all of their problems, that is what the People of Palestine, need.


Do you mean Jesus?


----------



## danielpalos (May 23, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > A lord spiritual and temporal, to take up all of their problems, that is what the People of Palestine, need.
> ...


No, I mean a Dey.  

It is time for a new day, in Palestine.


----------



## Sixties Fan (May 23, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


A Dey, has nothing to do with the topic of this thread, which deals with the suggestion that the Palestinians should have accepted the offers proposed to them.

They do not accept anything which has to do with Jews having sovereignty over any part of the Jewish ancient homeland.

Call it a Dry, call it a Caliphate, call it anything one likes.

They follow Islam and its teachings against the Jewish People.
Not much will change that, unless all involved stop giving them all the money and weapons they can use against Israel.

Some have, some are thinking of it, ALL should simply agree to stop feeding Hamas and the PA.


----------



## danielpalos (May 23, 2018)

Sixties Fan said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Why is the Middle East, worse than the South?  

The situation over there seems, more volatile than usual.  A Deylicate seems indicated due to the delicate nature of the situation over there.  And, a Dey can be a lord spiritual and temporal.  What People would be worse off, with a lord they can render all of their problems to?


----------

