# Gaza army



## aris2chat (Jul 25, 2015)

Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza

Their way of planning for peace????


----------



## Bleipriester (Jul 25, 2015)

You are wondering?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 25, 2015)

It's in their charter.  No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.


----------



## Bleipriester (Jul 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> It's in their charter.  No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.


Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Bleipriester said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > It's in their charter.  No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.
> ...



If Israel wanted to really do that it would already have gotten it over with  over 40 years ago.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 26, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza
> 
> Their way of planning for peace????


"Si vis pacem, para bellum".


----------



## Humanity (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Even the zionuts are not so stupid to think they would get away with genocide, now or 40 years ago!


----------



## Hollie (Jul 26, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza
> ...



What s shame that the world community continues to provide welfare payments to support Islamic terrorism.


----------



## Bleipriester (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Then, Israel could acknowledge Palestine, or not?


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 26, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza
> ...



Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
Why do they object to Israel arming and controlling it's border and building fences and wall?
Why object to Israel controlling the 'free' flow of weapons into gaza?

they too are prepared if gaza attacks again

Gaza does not have the right to form it's own army.  Any authorization for that would come from the PA.  

Please don't give me that nonsense of gaza be voted to government.  They were voted for seats in parliament, not to unilaterally take actions of military force or triggering a war with Israel.  Gaza was taken by force.
Hamas' actions should have nullified any participation in parliament.
PLO renounced terrorism in 1988.  Hamas is viewed as a terrorist group even by the PLO and is not a member.
Hamas does not have the right to act without parliaments approval.

Gaza does not have the legal authority to 'prepare for war'.  They should not be armed at all.
It does not have a right to act on it's own at all


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 26, 2015)

Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,

As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine _(the 1988 State of)_, Israel does not have a real firm future objective.

While the various political parties have their individual agendas, and positions, a collectively Israeli Foreign Policy really has not been formulated.



Bleipriester said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > It's in their charter.  No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Israelis agree on the need to survive the long standing Arab Palestinian objective to evict the Jewish State.  But much beyond that, the Israelis still are debating the future of their state and how it will develop regional relations.

The Arab Palestinians have formulated a long-term foreign policy based on the re-acquisition of the territory they believe is "their territory" as outlined by the Palestine Order in Council; within the boundaries determined by the Principal Allied Powers on the surrender of the Ottoman Empire.  This has not changed substantially since 1948.  And this is the contention the Israelis are still dealing with today.

As of yet, there is no reasonable expectation that any agreement made today with the Arab Palestinian will be honored for any length of time.  The past history and behaviors of the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated that any agreed upon peace will be short term until the Arab Palestinians as mustered enough military might and political support to make another act of aggression to _(in their eyes)_ liberate the territorial boundaries they consider their sovereign right; even though they have nothing that grants them that sovereign right.

The Arab Palestinians have made a solemn oath to continue the conflict until they liberate what they consider as Palestine.  And until they abdicate that oath, they can be expected to be contained.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bleipriester (Jul 26, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,
> 
> As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine _(the 1988 State of)_, Israel does not have a real firm future objective.
> 
> ...


Palestinians and Israelis have the same rights regarding an own nation. If the two parties are unable to resolve their dispute, we have the UN that is up to act and make sure, the rights of both peoples are considered.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...



Genocide is an Arab Muslim specialty.  That's how all these lands in the Middle East became Muslim.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,
> 
> As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine _(the 1988 State of)_, Israel does not have a real firm future objective.
> 
> ...



Even Arafat wasn't negotiating in good faith, which is why the peace deal during Clinton's years fell apart. It hasn't been as much about establishing this mythical Palestine, as much as the desire to destroy the Jewish state. At its heart this conflict is about religious ideology and will remain so.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 26, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
> Why do they object to Israel arming and controlling it's border and building fences and wall?
> Why object to Israel controlling the 'free' flow of weapons into gaza?
> 
> ...


That is not your (or Israel's) decision to make.

You do not have any right telling others how to live their lives.

Gazan's have every right to defend themselves from Israeli aggression.

They have a right to have weapons and an army to do that with.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 26, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,
> 
> As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine _(the 1988 State of)_, Israel does not have a real firm future objective.
> 
> ...


The "containment", is the cause of all the violence.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 26, 2015)

Bleipriester,  et al,

To a point, I agree.



Bleipriester said:


> Palestinians and Israelis have the same rights regarding an own nation. If the two parties are unable to resolve their dispute, we have the UN that is up to act and make sure, the rights of both peoples are considered.


*(COMMENT)*

I believe that your position is --- in part --- true.  But that it is not necessarily up to the UN to intervene and resolve the issues.


States shall accordingly seek early and just 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.  *General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV)*.​
However, I do not believe that the Arab Palestinian or the State of Palestine (1988) actually adheres to or follows the basic tenants in this regard:


*General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV)*. Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States

Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

In accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, States have the duty to refrain from propaganda for wars of aggression.

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.​
It must also be remembered that Israel never invaded or Occupied the Palestinian Territory.  In 1967, the West Bank was sovereign Jordanian territory (not Palestinian Territory) --- and resolved by Treaty in 1994.  Similarly, in 1967, the Gaza Strip was an Egyptian Military Governorship, with the All Palestine Government having been dissolved in 1959.  This dispute was also resolved by a Peace Treaty in 1979.  In the one case, Israel occupied Jordanian Territory; in the other case Israel occupied Egyptian Territory.

The disputes were mediated through the twin agreements known as the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (AKA: Oslo I) and the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (AKA:  Oslo II).   

At the current time, there is no reasonable expectation that either side will make the necessary break-through to achieve peace.  The current policy of the Arab Palestinians set by Political Branch of HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) is that the HAMAS Covenant is still in force and that HAMAS does not recognize of "The State of Israel" or the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hollie (Jul 26, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
> ...


Typically pointless, shortstop. Gaza does not have an army, it has a collection of Islamic terrorist syndicates, often hostile to one another.

The continuing Islamist terrorist attacks aimed at Israel are not undertaken by an armed, uniformed force but by Islamic terrorist networks who have every intention of launching attacks from civilian areas where there is relative safety from an aggressive Israeli retaliation. The islami. Terrorists you define as heroes are simply cowards who know full well that Israel will take steps to avoid civilian casualties.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


----------



## Hollie (Jul 26, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,
> ...


Awake from your coma, angry little short man. 

The containment is a necessary response to Islamic terrorism. You and others need to read the Hamas Charter and to make an attempt to understand that Cult Screed.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 26, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza
> 
> Their way of planning for peace????



And the Israeli way of planning for peace?

Continued occupation and extension of illegal settlements?

One day, someone will wake up, and see that NEITHER side is right...

When that day comes it will be like banging the heads together of two children arguing against each other!

They will both kick and scream, bleat and cry but there will be acceptance... Then, and only then, will there be peace!


----------



## Humanity (Jul 26, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?



Not just the Arab world...

Why does Israel refuse to sign up to nuclear treaties?

Why does Israel refuse weapons inspectors?

The WHOLE world is waiting for zionist Israel to unleash just ONE nuclear attack... Bye Bye Israel!

And THAT would be a shame! A shame for the moderate Jews who want NOTHING to do with the extremist zionists!


----------



## Hollie (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza
> ...


Can you identify where this alleged "occupation" is taking place?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
> ...


Why would Israel have a need to unleash a nuclear (or nukular) attack?

The conventional armed forces have been and still are, by far, the better of Arab-Moslem armies and their wars of attempted annihilation of the Jewish State.


----------



## Daniyel (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...


Strangely the Six days war tells a different story.


----------



## toastman (Jul 26, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
> ...



Hamas and Israel are in a state of war. If Israel is capable of stopping weapon shipments to Gaza, then that's too bad for Hamas. 

In fact, Hamas is more than welcome to try and do the same.


----------



## Penelope (Jul 26, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



Just think of what America could do with billions they send to Israel.


----------



## Penelope (Jul 26, 2015)

If Israel had to fight hand to hand , man to man with like weapons they'd be extinct. The IDF don't seem to be able to run, they just shoot. They let their bullets do the chasing.


----------



## Penelope (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,
> ...



There is no jewish state.


----------



## Penelope (Jul 26, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > If Israel had to fight hand to hand , man to man with like weapons they'd be extinct. The IDF don't seem to be able to run, they just shoot. They let their bullets do the chasing.
> ...



If only I drank I would probably careless about you Zionist, but I don't so I have a huge problem with IDF who shoot at kids and teens instead of chasing after them. Just too darn lazy to run I guess, and hell its not a jew life, so who in the hell cares. Yet here in the US a cop is suppose to chase a criminal miles, but not in Israel. Gaza has every right to protect itself from the IDF, but all Isarel needs to do is throw one of their fire bombs over or fly over and drop a few.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 26, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Typically pointless, shortstop. Gaza does not have an army, it has a collection of Islamic terrorist syndicates, often hostile to one another.
> 
> The continuing Islamist terrorist attacks aimed at Israel are not undertaken by an armed, uniformed force but by Islamic terrorist networks who have every intention of launching attacks from civilian areas where there is relative safety from an aggressive Israeli retaliation. The islami. Terrorists you define as heroes are simply cowards who know full well that Israel will take steps to avoid civilian casualties.


Gazan's are not terrorists, you racist piece of shit.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 26, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Typically pointless, shortstop. Gaza does not have an army, it has a collection of Islamic terrorist syndicates, often hostile to one another.
> ...


Is "Gazan" a race?

If you're referring to the welfare cheats who put Islamic terrorists into a political position, we might refer to them as _Islamic terrorist enablers. 
_
Does that offend your tender, little, sensibilities?

Maybe take a short break from your small, menial Joooooo hating.


----------



## toastman (Jul 26, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas and Israel are in a state of war. If Israel is capable of stopping weapon shipments to Gaza, then that's too bad for Hamas.
> ...



Sorry sir, please accept my apologies. May I speak now sir ?


Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Awake from your coma, angry little short man.
> ...



How was her post racist ?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
> ...



And so do Israelis have a right to defend themselves from Islamist savages. Let the games begin.  No more whining or complaining.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



The individual Muslim conquests, together with their beginning and ending dates, are as follows:


List of conquests:

*Muhammad's campaigns*
Main article: Military career of Muhammad

*Byzantine–Arab Wars: 634–750Edit*
Main article: Byzantine–Arab Wars
Further information: Khalid ibn al-Walid and 'Amr ibn al-'As
Wars were between the Byzantine Empire and at first the Rashidun and then the Umayyad caliphates and resulted in the conquest of the Syria region, Egypt, North Africa and Armenia (Byzantine Armenia and Sassanid Armenia).

*Under the RashidunEdit*
Main article: Rashidun conquests



Conquests of Muhammad and the Rashidun

The conquest of Syria, 637
The conquest of Armenia, 639
The conquest of Egypt, 639
The conquest of North Africa, 652
The conquest of Cyprus, 654
*Under the UmayyadsEdit*

The conquest of North Africa, 665
The first Arab siege of Constantinople, 674–678
The second Arab siege of Constantinople, 717–718
Conquest of Hispania, 711–718
The conquest of Georgia, 736
*Later conquestsEdit*

The conquest of Crete, 820
The conquest of Sicily and incursions into southern Italy, 827
Frontier warfare continued in the form of cross border raids between the Umayyads and the Byzantine Isaurian dynasty allied with the Khazars across Asia Minor. Byzantine naval dominance and Greek fire resulted in a major victory at the Battle of Akroinon (739); one of a series of military failures of the Caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik across the empire that checked the expansion of the Umayyads and hastened their fall.

*Military campaigns*

*Conquest of Persia and Mesopotamia: 633–651Edit*
Main article: Muslim conquest of Persia
Further information: Khalid ibn al-Walid and Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas
In the reign of Yazdgerd III, the last Sassanid ruler of the Persian Empire, an Arab Muslim army secured the conquest of Persia after their decisive defeats of the Sassanid army at the Battle of Walaja in 633 and Battle of al-Qādisiyyah in 636, but the final military victory didn't come until 642 when the Persian army was defeated at the Battle of Nahāvand. These victories brought Persia (modern Iran), and its territories and provinces comprising Caucasian Albania (Azerbaijan and southern Dagestan), Armenia, Assyria (Assuristan) and Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and south east Anatolia under Arab Muslim rule. Then, in 651, Yazdgerd III was murdered at Merv, ending the dynasty. His son Peroz III escaped through the Pamir Mountainsin what is now Tajikistan and arrived in Tang China.

*Conquest of Transoxiana: 662–751Edit*
Main articles: Islamic conquest of Afghanistan, Islamic conquest of Turkestan, Battle of the Defile and Battle of Talas
Further information: History of Arabs in Afghanistan
Following the First Fitna, the Umayyads resumed the push to capture Sassanid lands and began to move towards the conquest of lands east and north of the plateau towards Greater Khorasan and the Silk Road along Transoxiana. Following the collapse of the Sassanids, these regions had fallen under the sway of local Iranian and Turkic tribes as well as the Tang Dynasty. The conquest of Transoxiana (Ar. _Ma wara' al-nahr_) was chiefly the work of Qutayba ibn Muslim, who between 705 and 715 expanded Muslim control over Sogdiana, Khwarezm and the Jaxartes valley up to Ferghana. Following Qutayba's death in 715, local revolts and the defeats at the hands of the Chinese-sponsored Turgesh (chiefly the "Day of Thirst" in 724 and the Battle of the Defile in 731) led to a gradual loss of the province: by 738, the Turgesh and their Sogdian allies were raiding Khurasan south of the Oxus. However, the murder of the Turgesh _khagan_, Su-lu, and the conciliatory policies of Nasr ibn Sayyar towards the native population opened the way for a swift, albeit not total, restoration of Muslim control over Transoxiana in 739–741. Muslim control over the region was consolidated with the defeat of the armies of Tang China in the Battle of Talas in 751.



*MOD EDIT to comply with copyright rules: do not post entire articles and include the link please.*


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Hollie said:


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



Big mouth low IQ forgets that Gazan govt. is listed as a racist barbaric terrorist organization by the U.S. And the West.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
> ...



Who is demanding "weapons inspections" for Israel you friggin retard.  

Hamas, a terrorist organization, training an additional 25,000 Islamic assholes like you should be alarming to the world.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Israel is a Jewish state and will always be. Deal with it, you asylum escapee.


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


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



Soon they will be fighting erakat instead of abbas.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



*400 Years of Christian/Islamic Struggle: An Analysis*

*By Richard C. Csaplar, Jr.
Guest Columnist*
_
I was very disappointed to see that U.S. News would publish a clearly false article, adopting the world's clearly false, politically correct (PC) view of the place of the Crusades in history. What makes it even worse, the article hides its views under the additional headline falsehood, "The Truth About the Epic Clash Between Christianity and Islam." 

Let me explain.

The opening heading states, "During the Crusades, East and West first met." This is just totally in error, as any person with the slightest knowledge of history well knows. East and West had been fighting for at least 1,500 years before the first Crusade.

To give just a few examples -- the Persians invaded Europe in an attempt to conquer the Greeks in the fifth century B.C. The Greek, Alexander the Great, attempted to conquer all of Asia, as far as India, in the fourth century B.C. Both the Persians of the east and the Greeks of the west set up colonial empires founded upon bloody military conquest. The Romans established by bloody military conquest colonies in Mesopotamia, northwestern Arabia, and Assyria in the second century A.D. 

A different type of bloody conquest occurred through the movement of whole tribal groups between the east and the west. Again, just to name a few, the Huns, the Goths, and the Avars came from as far away as western Asia, central Asia, and China respectively in the fifth through the seventh centuries A.D. Indeed, the Avars from northern China and Mongolia were besieging Constantinople in 626 A.D., at the very moment Mohammed was a merchant in Arabia. Indeed, the Avars, by this siege, were one of the forces that weakened the Byzantines (there were many other, perhaps more important, forces) to the extent that most of the Byzantine mid-eastern empire fell relatively easily to the Muslims. 

But let's give the writer the benefit of the doubt and say that the author meant that "During the Crusades, Islam and Christianity first met." This, of course, is also totally false. 

Let us review the Muslim conquest. In 624, Mohammed led a raid for booty and plunder against a Meccan caravan, killing 70 Meccans for mere material gain. Between 630 A.D. and the death of Mohammed in 632 A.D., Muslims -- on at least one occasion led by Mohammed -- had conquered the bulk of western Arabia and southern Palestine through approximately a dozen separate invasions and bloody conquests. These conquests were in large part "Holy wars," putting the lie to another statement in the U.S. News article that proclaimed the Crusades "The First Holy War," as if the Christians had invented the concept of a holy war. After Mohammed's death in 632, the new Muslim caliph, Abu Bakr, launched Islam into almost 1,500 years of continual imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest and subjugation of others through invasion and war, a role Islam continues to this very day. 

You will note the string of adjectives and may have some objection to my using them. They are used because they are the absolute truth. Anyone denying them is a victim of PC thinking, ignorant of history, or lying to protect Islam. Let us take each word separately before we proceed further in our true history of the relationship between the Christian west and the Islamic east. 

*Imperialistic *

The Muslim wars of imperialist conquest have been launched for almost 1,500 years against hundreds of nations, over millions of square miles (significantly larger than the British Empire at its peak). The lust for Muslim imperialist conquest stretched from southern France to the Philippines, from Austria to Nigeria, and from central Asia to New Guinea. This is the classic definition of imperialism -- "the policy and practice of seeking to dominate the economic and political affairs of weaker countries." 
_
*MOD EDIT to comply with copyright rules:  do not post an entire article, post a medium amount and then add the link.  Please include links with cut and paste.

Remainder of article at: 1 400 Years of Islamic Aggression An Analysis*


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Penelope said:


> If Israel had to fight hand to hand , man to man with like weapons they'd be extinct. The IDF don't seem to be able to run, they just shoot. They let their bullets do the chasing.



Yeah and we all know how good Muslims are in man to man fighting!  Ha ha ha.  That's why they hide behind their women and children while targeting other women and children. Such a brave noble people.


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



>>400 Years of Christian/Islamic Struggle: An Analysis

By Richard C. Csaplar, Jr.
_Guest Columnist_<<

*1,400 years*


----------



## Humanity (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > If Israel had to fight hand to hand , man to man with like weapons they'd be extinct. The IDF don't seem to be able to run, they just shoot. They let their bullets do the chasing.
> ...



Because we all see how great Israel is at hand to hand combat with their F-15's and F-16's... Oh I forgot their attack helicopters...

Oooppss, question... How many fighter jets are here available to Gazan's?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



Keep up will ya! Groups of Arab nations in exponentially greater numbers attacked the small nation of Israel several times and each time they got their butts kicked.  That's why Muslims have now resorted to terrorizing the world.  400 million surrounding Arabs and Muslims vs 6 million Jews.  Ha ha ha. 

When it comes to armies they are pathetic cowards.  Can you name one victory in modern history?  

Hope that jogs your memory, Achmed.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 26, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...


You're the perfect commander for the Gazan _Reich_, a know-nothing.

Israeli's military is superior to any collection of Islamic terrorists who use civilians as human shields. Their conventional forces, tactics and planning have proven superior to any Arab (combined Arab) aggression. They develop strategies and tactics by which they seek to maximize their advantages while minimizing their weaknesses. .

The bulk of analysis during any ground engagement goes into deducing the enemy's objective from his tactics. That underlying principle is so fundamental that it's almost invisible: You're fighting specifically to deny the enemy his objective, and to misconceive it all but guarantees that he'll reach it despite you.

On the other side of the ledger is _your_ objective: the specific goal you're trying to reach in the circumstances before you. Oftentimes, it's merely the negation of your enemy's objective. In simple, two-contestant actions, that's almost always the case.

A shooting war is not intended to be a fair fight. As a participant, you're hoping to .... you know..... win.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 26, 2015)

Arab Muslims can't and won't fight unless they can kill unsuspecting civilians. Then suddenly they're these heroic freedom fighters. LOL. Look at the Iraqi army, all this training, modern weaponry,  and overwhelmingly greater numbers didn't help.  A band of ISIS fighters comes marching in, and they dropped their weapons and started running.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Arab Muslims can't and won't fight unless they can kill unsuspecting civilians. Then suddenly they're these heroic freedom fighters. LOL. Look at the Iraqi army, all this training, modern weaponry,  and overwhelmingly greater numbers didn't help.  A band of ISIS fighters comes marching in, and they dropped their weapons and started running.


Much like the Pali cowards who launch rockets at Israel from civilian areas:
Hamas DID use schools and hospitals in Gaza Strip as human shields Daily Mail Online

And then hike-up their man dresses and run when the incoming starts.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Yeah and we all know how good Muslims are in man to man fighting!  Ha ha ha.  That's why they hide behind their women and children while targeting other women and children. Such a brave noble people.


Kind of like this?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 26, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Arab Muslims can't and won't fight unless they can kill unsuspecting civilians. Then suddenly they're these heroic freedom fighters. LOL. Look at the Iraqi army, all this training, modern weaponry,  and overwhelmingly greater numbers didn't help.  A band of ISIS fighters comes marching in, and they dropped their weapons and started running.
> ...


From your own link, whore.

_"'The Israelis kept saying rockets were fired from schools or hospitals when in fact *they were fired 200 or 300 meters (yards) away*"_​So no, whore, they were not fired from schools or hospitals.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 26, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Is "Gazan" a race?
> 
> If you're referring to the welfare cheats who put Islamic terrorists into a political position, we might refer to them as _Islamic terrorist enablers.
> _
> ...


Why would I hate Jews, whore?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Big mouth low IQ forgets that Gazan govt. is listed as a racist barbaric terrorist organization by the U.S. And the West.


And hasn't committed a terrorist act, since 2005.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> And so do Israelis have a right to defend themselves from Islamist savages. Let the games begin.  No more whining or complaining.


An occupational force, cannot claim self defense.


----------



## Daniyel (Jul 26, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Big mouth low IQ forgets that Gazan govt. is listed as a racist barbaric terrorist organization by the U.S. And the West.
> ...


You mean Hamas or Fatah?
Hamas official we were behind the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers World news The Guardian


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Yes, big mouth low IQ asshole, they fired rockets from schools, hospitals, hotels, and mosques. Would you like to see the report, shithead?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Oh, my. The angry short boy is incensed that his Islamic terrorist heroes are shown to be the cowards they truly are. 

From the link: "Official says group had no choice but to launch rockets from civilian areas"

Read more: Hamas DID use schools and hospitals in Gaza Strip as human shields Daily Mail Online 


You poor, little boy. Have you been fitted for your man-dress yet?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Big mouth low IQ forgets that Gazan govt. is listed as a racist barbaric terrorist organization by the U.S. And the West.
> ...


So, you don't consider continued launching of rockets at  neighboring country a terrorist act or act of war?

How generous of you to support your Death Cult heroes.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > And so do Israelis have a right to defend themselves from Islamist savages. Let the games begin.  No more whining or complaining.
> ...


There is no occupation. 

Islamic terrorism can however, occasionally use the support of short- minded, short of stature types to excuse their terrorism. 

When the shooting war starts, the terrorists and their cheerleader cowards flailing their Pom Poms suffer the inevitable smack down.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



From the Golan heights to Sinai; from the Jordan river to the Western sea.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Daniyel said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Only the Zionist version.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


An act of resistance to occupation and oppression and the only death cult in the region is Zionism.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


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



No, Just USA and Israel. The rest of the West have varying views and at best put them on a list of Terrorist Groups just to appease the aforementioned. The French, for example, have an unofficial diplomatic mission in Gaza City...


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


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


What "occupation"? There is no occupation.

Islamic terrorist attacks aimed at Israel from Gaza are a function of the Hama's Charter.

It's remarkable that you Islamic terrorist cheerleaders have never read the Hamas War Manual, AKA its Death Cult Charter.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> There is no occupation.



Only in your delusional mind...

How about a link that proves there is no occupation?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



I'll take your pointless response as an example of what you typically post.

Tell us about the last three wars of aggression waged by arab islamics intended to complete their islamo-genocide. 

They were humiliating islamo-defeats.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...





Roudy said:


> Israel is a Jewish state and will always be.


...while it lasts.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

A link to what doesn't exist?

You suffer from Shaken Baby Syndrome, right?


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



I think I made my point, albeit graphically. 

What "last three wars of aggression waged by arab islamics intended to complete their islamo-genocide?" Must have blinked and missed them.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> A link to what doesn't exist?
> 
> You suffer from Shaken Baby Syndrome, right?



Do you believe that the Supreme Court of Israel is telling lies then when they say that Israel a "belligerent occupier"?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > A link to what doesn't exist?
> ...



Israel still controls some parts of the West Bank.  It is divided into Areas A, B, and C.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > A link to what doesn't exist?
> ...


Are you aware that Israel does not occupy Gaza'istan or the West Bank?

Have you sought treatment for your condition?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Actually some areas of the West Bank are still controlled by Israel.  For instance, 80% of Hebron is controlled by Palestine and 20% by Israel.  There are 3 areas in the West Bank, reflecting varying degrees of control.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



I am aware that Israel does not occupy any of Gaza... Simply maintains control over air, land and sea.

Israel occupies WB, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem...

Irrefutable facts that everyone seems to accept, including Supreme Court of Israel...


----------



## Penelope (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Israel has not and is not and will not be a "jewish" state.  From what I read its a secular state.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


Hamas does not have the right to act without parliaments approval.​
Neither do the Fatah forces ruling the West Bank. But that is another story for another day.

Palestine has no army. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. are civilian militias. They are civilians defending their country.

What does the Geneva Conventions say about civilians defending their country? Interesting question.


----------



## Coyote (Jul 27, 2015)

*Thread has been cleaned a second time and warnings issued.  Posts in IP must have (sufficient) content related to the topic in addition to any insults.  If your post is simply a vehicle to lob insults then take it to the FLAME ZONE.*


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



I think Hollie means that the WB, GH and East Jerusalem are all part of Eretz  Yisrael, the ancient Land of Israel.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



Israel controls portions of the West Bank as do the islamics. You have no issue with islamist occupation. 

Golan was seized as result of a failed war of aggression by Islamics. 

Since when is East Jerusalem an Islamist waqf?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,
> 
> As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine _(the 1988 State of)_, Israel does not have a real firm future objective.
> 
> ...


The Arab Palestinians have formulated a long-term foreign policy based on the re-acquisition of the territory they believe is "their territory" as outlined by the Palestine Order in Council; within the boundaries determined by the Principal Allied Powers on the surrender of the Ottoman Empire. This has not changed substantially since 1948. And this is the contention the Israelis are still dealing with today.​
Why should the Palestinians change their policies.

There is no law demanding that they cede land to foreign colonizers.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Bleipriester,  et al,
> 
> To a point, I agree.
> 
> ...


You are basing your post on the false premise that this is an international conflict.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


Hamas has a military wing, thus your making excuses for Islamist terrorism is weak.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


Hamas is a political party. It is not a government.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Congratulations on the back pedal and admitting that WB and Golan are occupied...

Now you just gotta get your heard around East Jerusalem being occupied...


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


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


So, for conveniences sake and to avoid having to take responsibility for Islamic terrorism, Hamas is not an elected entity charged with governing?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


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


Hamas was the majority party in the Palestinian Authority.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


No backpedal. Just giving you the facts. The Golan being a spoil of war suggests no occupation. The West Bank is disputed territory.

Obviously your definition of occupation differs when applied to Islamic terrorists.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


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


Were they elected to govern?


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Obviously your definition of occupation differs to the rest of the world (Oh except Israel's of course. But, you wouldn't expect the occupier to admit it would you!)


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


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


Palestinian March 2007 National Unity Government - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There is a lot in here that does not hold up to scrutiny but it does show the basic structure.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


I wasn't aware you were tasked with offering definitions on behalf of the rest of the world.

By what authority do your heroes in Hamas, an Islamic terrorist group and Pali squatters have to occupy portions of the West Bank?

Your definitions are skewed only to placate your insensate Joooooo hatreds. You always have the option to reannounce your allegiance to Islamic terrorism and pick up an AK-47, wannabe.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> I wasn't aware you were tasked with offering definitions on behalf of the rest of the world.



No definition offerings required...

The rest of the world has already decided...

Including Supreme Court of Israel...

Keep back pedaling Hollie... It's great to watch!


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I wasn't aware you were tasked with offering definitions on behalf of the rest of the world.
> ...


What "rest of the world"? You make these silly comments, totally unsupported and then backpedal when you're required to support them.

So, you backpeddled on defining who, exactly, gave the Pali squatters an entitlement to occupy parts of Gaza.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I wasn't aware you were tasked with offering definitions on behalf of the rest of the world.
> ...


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


And the UN considers Israel as "oppressing" women in Gaza as opposed to a politico-religious ideology with a 1,400 year history of true oppression of women.

Anything from the UN about the islamist occupation of portions of the West Bank?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



You, Tinmore, consider the whole of Israel to be occupied, so your opinion doesn't count.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



hahahahaha...

Supported well enough Mr Occupation Denier!

No back pedaling here Hollie... 

Want me to post ALL those links again? Surely not... hahahahahaha


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


I knew you would shuffle off when required to support your pointless "... rest of the world", nonsense.

You should consider trying out for the islamic terrorist swim team - the backstroke.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



Not according to Nutandyahoo and his cronies, "ein volk, ein reich...." you know the rest. Zionist Israel is a Herrenvolk Democracy, Herrenvolk democracy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Schmuck!

Humanity Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

United Nations Security Council Resolution 478 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Israeli-occupied territories - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Status of territories captured by Israel - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
UN Security Council Calls for Lifting of Israeli Siege and Occupation - International Middle East Media Center
Court orders Israel s Finance Ministry to release report boycott could cost Israel 10 billion a year

You already seen these from another thread where you denied any "occupation"

_How many countries have an embassy in Jerusalem? Not one!

Israel declared Jerusalem as it's capital... Not a single country recognises Jerusalem as the capital of Israel... Not even the USA!

Do you know why? Simply that East Jerusalem is under Israeli occupation..._

Get pedaling Hollie...


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


Most of the Jordan valley is also a "military zone" or "firing zone" or "security zone" http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_firing_zone_factsheet_august_2012_english.pdf


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


Oh, stop! Oh, my ribs...too much.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


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


Pretty embarrassing for you. You're too befuddled to offer a relevant comment so you're forced to spam the thread.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


It is not just my opinion. Nobody has posted any proof to the contrary.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





Hollie said:


> The Golan being a spoil of war suggests no occupation



Oh dear, someone's forgotten that land can no longer be taken as "spoils of war", whether or not the war was "aggressive" or "defensive". The Golan is occupied by the Zionists who are attempting to seed colonies there and illegally annexed; not even America recognises the Golan as part of the Zionist "Greater Israel" project. The West bank is no longer disputed. Jordan gave up any claim in favour of the Palestinians. It's now Occupied Palestine.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



You should go on the stage, you're talent for comedy is evident for all to see. When you say anything worth taking seriously I'll comment, until then...


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


I see. Although you grant an exception to the Ottomans who were just the most recent conquerors of the territories.

Apparently, the West Bank is disputed. Have you left your basement recently?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


It is illegal to acquire territory by force. It is also illegal to annex occupied territory.

Israel has placed itself into a bad situation.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


I just find it interesting that your only contribution to the thread is to spam post after post with smiley faces.

You really should confine yourself to reading and avoid more of your pointlessness.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





Hollie said:


> You make these silly comments, totally unsupported and then backpedal when you're required to support them.


 Erm...no that's you Hollie, I've yet to see you produce anything other than scripted Hasbara talking points and snide comments.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


It is not an exception. Conquest by force only became illegal a hundred years ago or so.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


But you excuse Islamic terrorists from the very actions you accuse Israel of doing. 

You have really made no case for some "annexation" you claim. Yet, you rattle on with excuses for arab-moslem squatters and welfare cheats as having an entitlement to illegality.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


So how does that excuse your Islamic terrorist heroes in Gaza?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


There's a good fellow.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


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


I doesn't.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Apparently, the West Bank is disputed.



The only country to call the West Bank "disputed" is.... Israel


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


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


Which means you're just crying a river of crocodile tears because Islamic fascism has met the business end of Lockheed-Martin.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently, the West Bank is disputed.
> ...


And the Pal Islamic terrorists.

For all the flailing of your Pom Poms in support of Islamic fascism, your heroes occupying Gaza are no closer now to their hoped-for Jooooooo genocide than they were decades ago.

That's what I call "putting the _had_ in Gee-had".


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently, the West Bank is disputed.
> ...



You, Tinmore, have no right to comment on the West Bank since you consider the whole of Israel to be "occupied".  Come back when you are ready just to talk about the "territories".


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Hah?  Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by the United Kingdom, EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, U.S., Israel, and many other countries.  And recently Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and a few other Arab countries. A terrorist is a terrorist and Palestinians are led by a bunch of terrorist savages. Arafat wasn't any better.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Maybe.   I could say the same about your premise:  That it is not an international conflict.


*How is the term "Armed Conflict" defined in international humanitarian law?*
*17-03-2008*
Opinion paper - definition of "international armed conflict" and "non-international armed conflict" under International Humanitarian Law, the branch of international law which governs armed conflict.

The States parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions have entrusted the ICRC, through the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, " to work for the understanding and dissemination of knowledge of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts and to prepare any development thereof " Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, art. 5, para. 2(g).. It is on this basis that the ICRC takes this opportunity to present the prevailing legal opinion on the definition of " international armed conflict " and " non-international armed conflict " under International Humanitarian Law, the branch of international law which governs armed conflict.

International humanitarian law distinguishes two types of armed conflicts, namely:


international armed conflicts, opposing two or more States, and


non-international armed conflicts, between governmental forces and non-governmental armed groups, or between such groups only. IHL treaty law also establishes a distinction between non-international armed conflicts in the meaning of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and non-international armed conflicts falling within the definition provided in Art. 1 of Additional Protocol II.
Legally speaking, no other type of armed conflict exists. It is nevertheless important to underline that a situation can evolve from one type of armed conflict to another, depending on the facts prevailing at a certain moment.​
In order for your premise to be true, it has to be declared that the State of Israel does not exist; OR --- the State of Palestine does not exist; --- OR both do not exist as a State.

In order to be a "High Contracting Party" to the UN Charter, or the Geneva Convention, or the Rome Statutes, the "party" must be a state and have the capacity to enter into the agreement.  Both the State of Israel (1948) and the State of Palestine (1988) have entered into treaties and agreements under the *1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES*:
PART II. CONCLUSION AND ENTRY INTO FORCE OF TREATIES
SECTION 1. CONCLUSION OF TREATIES

Article 6 Capacity of States to Conclude Treaties:   Every State possesses capacity to conclude treaties.​


P F Tinmore said:


> You are basing your post on the false premise that this is an international conflict.


*(REFENRENCES)*

Israel Declaration of Independence
Israeli Declaration to Append the Application to the United Nations
Application of Israel for admission to membership in the United Nations (A/818)
Favorable Recommendation of the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations, by the UN Security Council
273 (III). Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations
Peace Treaty between The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Government of the State of Israel 
Treaty of Peace between the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the State of Israel
*(COMMENT)*

I can demonstrate quite easily that Israel is a "state:"

Established under its right to self-determination under the UN guidance proved in the Steps Preparatory to Independence found in General Assembly 181(II).
Wherein the UN made an official and world-wide public press announcement that the GA/RES/181(II) was implemented.
Where by the State of Israel made application for FULL membership to the UN.
Where by the UN Security Council recommended the admission to the UN.
Where by the General Assembly accepted the State of Israel as a FULL member.
So I only interpret that you are going to claim that the State of Israel was (somehow) illegal recognized by the UN membership and improperly recommended and forwarded by the Security Council. And I can only further imagine that where the UN recognition _Affirms its determination_ to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfills the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living *side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders*; is flawed. 

So, in order for the argument to be made that the conflict is not an international nature, there would be no State of Palestine (_alla_ 1988).

Is that your point?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



It's lasted since its statehood was announced in 1948 and will continue to be a strong, prosperous democracy long after you're gone. Israel is here to stay.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > A link to what doesn't exist?
> ...



So you now accept all of the supreme courts rulings and opinions, or just those that you can paraphrase and take out of context?  But thanks for confirming that Israel is a democracy like the U.S. Where there is rule of law.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



She's off again....the native population has every right to the land they've lived in for over a thousand of years. There is no historical evidence that the Arabs who conquered Palestine in the 7th century dispossessed or removed the native population. The only people who were forced to leave were the Byzantine elites, who were given the choice to convert to Islam and stay or remain Christian and leave; most left. For at least a century afterwards the native cities, towns and communities remained largely self-governing, but paying taxes to the Arab overlords who took over the estates left by the Byzantine nobility. Gradually the natives converted from Christianity or Judaism and adopted Arab culture. there was never any colonisation in Palestine. The only squatters are the Jewish Europeans who started colonising Palestine in the late 19th early 20th century and the settlers who are now trying to colonise the what's left of historical Palestine.

Here's a good book you can read about the subject; it's apolitical,

The Great Arab Conquests How The Spread Of Islam Changed The World We Live In Amazon.co.uk Hugh Kennedy 9780753823897 Books

Or this one   

In God s Path The Arab Conquests and the Creation of an Islamic Empire Ancient Warfare and Civilization Amazon.co.uk Robert G. Hoyland 9780199916368 Books

Try them, they might just open your mind.......I won't hold my breath.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Come back when you can prove me to be incorrect.

I won't be holding my breath.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



You read wrong. The problem Muslim savages have with Israel is that it's ruled by Jews. If it was ruled by one of these brutal Muslim regimes (take your pick) that was slaughtering and oppressing it's people, there wouldn't be anything unusual to talk about.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by the United Kingdom



Nope, only the al-Qassem Brigades. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...nt_data/file/417888/Proscription-20150327.pdf


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Then ISIS is a political party as well, by your definition. They are are fighting to establish an Islamic Shariah terrorist shithole in Iraq and Syria, and Hamas is fighting to do that in Israel.  Hamas will fail, as others like it have.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


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


You are selectively and dishonestly ignoring the many times the area has been conquered and changed ownership.

You're also selectively and dishonestly choosing not to acknowledge that the Jews have a historical connection to the land that far predates the invention of islamism and Moslems.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



The problem Muslims (and most other reasonable people for that matter) have with Israel is that it is ruled by *Zionists*, who just happen to be mainly Jewish, unfortunately. This confuses the Jewish diaspora into supporting what they would otherwise oppose vigorously, the savage and brutal oppression of one people by another.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



You need to start backpedaling faster Hollie... hahahaha

The only country to call the West Bank "disputed" is.... Israel

Quick, pedal, pedal hahahaha


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by the United Kingdom
> ...



Which is the military wing of Hamas that is totally controlled by Hamas  Ha ha ha. What a fool.    And the EU, Canada, Japan, and Australia?  How does it feel to be wrong so much Monte the MonkeyNazi, that you now have to resort to using your sock challenger to troll this forum?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas is listed as a terrorist organization by the United Kingdom
> ...


Wrong. As usual. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...t_qCsfoxinf87jhGg&sig2=NW3JmKG2_zoDmGWG6VMTMQ


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


No need to flail your Pom Poms for the squatters and welfare cheats you admire.

The disputed territories are called "disputed" for  reason. Can you guess what that reason is?


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



I don't track every judgement or opinion of the Supreme Court of Israel.. .Do you? Unlikely!

There is no debate whether the Supreme Court considers Israel a "belligerent occupier"... No paraphrasing, no out of context... Just simple fact...

I have NEVER said that Israel ISN'T a democracy...


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



No I'm not.  

Jewish monotheism may well have developed in the Judean hills and amongst a few local warlords for a short time in the pre-historic past, so there's a tenuous connection there. Judaism however, was invented and developed in Babylonia by Judean exiles so there's a far greater connection with Iraq than Palestine in that regard.

Here are two more good books well worth the read:

The Invention of the Jewish People Amazon.co.uk Shlomo Sand 9781844676231 Books

The Invention of the Land of Israel From Holy Land to Homeland Amazon.co.uk Shlomo Sand 9781781680834 Books

again, I won't hold my breath.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



They are called "disputed" by ONE country... Israel...

For the rest of the planet it is "occupied".

Can you guess why ONLY Israel, as the occupiers, call it "disputed"?

It's like taking candy from a baby with some people hahahahaha


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



islam has been at war with the non Muslim world and will be for the foreseeable time.  Israel is just one of the many hotspots and it is doing a great job dealing with the medieval savages.  Muslims want to destroy Israel because it is a Jewish state.  Come on Monte. Wake up and smell the Jihad.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


That's the same phony claim you made before which you couldn't support.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


You can hold your breath for as long as you wish. It's just a fact that Judaism existed in the area of Palestine long before the invention of islamism by a desert child molester.

You are aware that muhammud (swish) stole ruthlessly from both Judaism and Christianity in the formulation of his politico-religious ideology, right?.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


....for now. The wheel of time and history moves on....


----------



## Coyote (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Only Israel calls them "disputed".  That's kind of like the way North Korea calls itself The "Democratic" People's Republic of Korea.  No other country agrees and neither does the Israeli High Court.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

et al,

If the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) supports the "al-Qassem Brigades," a designated terrorist organization, then --- by extension, HAMAS is a "state that supports terrorism."



Roudy said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

But the real issue is that HAMAS _(by extension the Palestinians at large)_ do not recognize Israel's right to exist.  And in the greater sense, have pledged to continue a struggle against the existence of Israel.  That is, by any measure, a declaration of war which they have pursued since before 1948.

The only way that I can envision the Israelis backing away from the policy of containment is is the UN Security Council absolutely pledges to retaliate against the Palestinians in a militarily decisive manner should the Palestinians launch rockets and mortars, carryout insurgent attacks or acts of terrorism --- should the Israelis lift the blockade and withdraw from the Jordan Valley.   If, in the absence of the UNSC to intervene in a 24 hour period to such hostile actions, that the UNSC and the GA pre-authorize a militarily decisive intervention by the IDF without restrictions and occupy the entirety of the State of Palestine; without prejudice towards Israel.  Otherwise, all it does is invite the Palestinians to continue their hostile activities.

It would be absolutely ridiculous for the international community to demand that containment measures be lifted from a state that supports a number of different terrorist organizations and then stipulate that hostile efforts initiated by them go without enforcement measures already in place and that penalties to applied.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


... and so does Islamic terrorism with people like you to promote it.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Links provided you Occupation Denier you! 

As I said yesterday, if you don't want to be educated then thats your issue not mine! 

I am not going to repost... AGAIN... Links that prove you are an idiot!

I don't need to prove you an idiot, you do that very well all by yourself!


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Who cares, it doesn't give European colonists that happen to follow Judaism the right to invade and colonise another people's land. I've no problem with Jewish people living anywhere in the world where their whim takes them so long as they live alongside the natives, learn their language, treat them as equals. Not dispossess them and oppress them in the name of some mythical holy book mumbo-jumbo.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Wow, that was deep Monte.  I think "what goes up must come down"...how about that one?  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


There was no colonization for people who had a historical connection to the land long before the invention of a fascist politico- religious ideology.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


Actually, they're statements of history which you are unable to refute, thus your pointless spam.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

So there WERE links then Hollie?

Refuted? How, when you didn't see them?

Name calling ? Then don't do it!


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> et al,
> 
> If the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) supports the "al-Qassem Brigades," a designated terrorist organization, then --- by extension, HAMAS is a "state that supports terrorism."
> 
> ...





RoccoR said:


> But the real issue is that HAMAS _(by extension the Palestinians at large)_ do not recognize Israel's right to exist.



Always wanted to ask this question, "why should they, Zionist Israel does not recognise Palestine?"

What particular right does Israel have to exist over and above any other state in the world? In terms of armed conflict when the war is over both sides make peace and ultimately mutually recognise each other. Zionist Israel is the only country that demands recognition as a pre-requisite to any peace negotiation. Cart before the horse situation, methinks.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> If the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) supports the "al-Qassem Brigades," a designated terrorist organization, then --- by extension, HAMAS is a "state that supports terrorism."



The British government disagrees with you. Oh, and Hamas is not a state, it's a political party. We've had 30 years of home grown terrorism and we learned to make distinctions like these. We now have peace, the Zionists, not so much....


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Maybe.   I could say the same about your premise:  That it is not an international conflict.
> 
> ...


In order for your premise to be true, it has to be declared that the State of Israel does not exist; OR --- the State of Palestine does not exist; --- OR both do not exist as a State.​
Indeed.

The UN has no authority:
To create or disband states.
To transfer land from one people to another.
To create or change borders.

The UN can only give states political recognition. This has everything to do with politics and has nothing to do with law.

Only the people of a defined territory have the right to declare statehood inside their defined territory.

So we must move on from there.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Yeah, right, whatever. So there's no chance of you reading any of the books I've suggested? Two of them were by a Jewish professor, who comprehensively demolishes the  historical connection of European colonists with Palestine.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


Exactly right. Judaism has a connection to the land that far precedes the abomination of Islamic ideology. 

I would suggest that you learn some history as you're unwilling to separate your islamist fascist proclivities from contingent history.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger,  et al,

I thought HAMAS was part of the Unity Government?



Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > If the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) supports the "al-Qassem Brigades," a designated terrorist organization, then --- by extension, HAMAS is a "state that supports terrorism."
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

So if it is only a party, how does it have the authority to have a government military wing and claim control over the Gaza Strip? 

So I guess, since it is not an element of government, then any action it takes exercising the use of force is illegal? 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I did not claim the UN created anything.  I stated it "recognized" Israel as a state and that the body of "states" that make-up the General Assembly recognized Israel as a state.  What makes Israel a state, as I said was that it declared Independence (exercising the right of self-determination) under the criteria and a process that other "states" established as right and proper.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I don't believe I used the term "authority."  I don't believe I used the terms "create" --- "transfer" --- "disband."  I believe the UN used the term "border" in their recognition of Palestine in 2012 (not me)!!!  I agree with you.  The Palestinians have a very questionable defined territory.  I am not sure they actually have a border control point that is not managed by someone else.  It seems that the entirety of the West Bank, by Treaty, is inside the "international boundary" of Israel (although I'm not sure Israel actually wants it).

You are making an assumption.  You are stipulating that the Jewish People did not have the right to self-determination.  The People had the Right of Self-determination, and established their territory.  It is outlined by sovereign control for which the Arab Palestinian people cannot challenge, and that all states in every direction understand that Israel exercised their sovereign authority over.

I believe it is the Palestinians that are whining about sovereignty and their territorial integrity.  The Palestinian people have never really established sovereign territorial control over any territory with a coherent government.  While HAMAS maintains they have control over the Gaza Strip, a completely different group of Palestinians have control over Area "A" and parts of Area "B" --- but not any part of Area "C."

Don't try to rephrase my comment --- trying to make an improper point.

By the time the Palestinians quite messing around, they will have nothing left to call their own.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Monte stops trolling and challenger his sock, takes over with the usual bullshit about colonialists.  Is challenger going to start repetitively posting the same mutilated, irrelevant, and misrepresented documents as MonkeyNazi?  We can't wait.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Because those active zionuts here would NEVER think about repetitively posting the same mutilated, irrelevant, and misrepresented documents... Copy and Paste Bandits!


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I did not claim the UN created anything.  I stated it "recognized" Israel as a state and that the body of "states" that make-up the General Assembly recognized Israel as a state.  What makes Israel a state, as I said was that it declared Independence (exercising the right of self-determination) under the criteria and a process that other "states" established as right and proper.
> 
> ...


The Palestinians have a very questionable defined territory. I am not sure they actually have a border control point that is not managed by someone else.​
Military control (occupation) is quite different than the right to sovereignty.

That is why it is says the the people have the right to self determination *without external interference.*

*You always miss that point. Always, always, always!*


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I did not claim the UN created anything.  I stated it "recognized" Israel as a state and that the body of "states" that make-up the General Assembly recognized Israel as a state.  What makes Israel a state, as I said was that it declared Independence (exercising the right of self-determination) under the criteria and a process that other "states" established as right and proper.
> 
> ...


I believe the UN used the term "border" in their recognition of Palestine in 2012 (not me)!!!​
Indeed the UN specifies 1967 borders. There are not, and have never been, 1967 borders. In fact the UN specifically stated that they were *not* borders.

A political move that has nothing to do with legalities.

My point.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I did not claim the UN created anything.  I stated it "recognized" Israel as a state and that the body of "states" that make-up the General Assembly recognized Israel as a state.  What makes Israel a state, as I said was that it declared Independence (exercising the right of self-determination) under the criteria and a process that other "states" established as right and proper.
> 
> ...


It seems that the entirety of the West Bank, by Treaty, is inside the "international boundary" of Israel (although I'm not sure Israel actually wants it).​


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger,  et al,

Hummm --- Is there an assumption here, embedded in the question?



Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Relative to recognition:

*3. LETTER FROM PRIME MINISTER RABIN TO YASSER ARAFAT:*

September 9, 1993

Yasser Arafat
Chairman
The Palestinian Liberation Organization

Mr. Chairman,

In response to your letter of September 9, 1993, I wish to confirm to you that, in light of the PLO commitments included in your letter, the Government of Israel has decided to recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people and commence negotiations with the PLO within the Middle East peace process.

_Yitzhak Rabin_
Prime Minister of Israel

[end]

Posted July 2003
Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs​
The Israeli Recognition was absolutely consistent with the Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine wherein the Arab League affirmed "the right of the Palestinian people to establish an independent "national authority under the command" of the Palestine Liberation Organization (1974), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated. This authority, once it is established, shall enjoy the support of the Arab states in all fields and at all levels."   _(It should be noted that a "National Command Authority" (NCA) does NOT necessarily imply a government for the state.  In fact, the NCA for the United States is a subordinate activity of the Department of Defense.  The National Command Authority (NCA) for Pakistan is held under the Chairmanship of Prime Minister Mr Muhammad Nawaz Sharif.) _ In the case of Palestine, independence was not declared for more than a decade later (1988).


Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, *such as armistice lines*, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.
*SOURCE:* Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (1970)​
Israel does not claim to have a right beyond that of other people.

Internationally, the "state parties" to the 1948-1949 Arab - Israeli Conflict did not include a "state party" known as the Palestinians.  The two elements of the irregular Palestinian contribution to the conflict _(The Holy War Army and Arab Liberation Army --- had been engaged since the UN adoption of G/RES/181 in November 1947)_ no longer exist, and they were not "state parties" to the conflict.  "The 1949 Armistice Agreements are a set of agreements signed during 1949 between Israel and neighboring Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria. The agreements ended the official hostilities of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, and established Armistice Demarcation Lines between Israeli forces and Jordanian-Iraqi forces, also known as the Green Line."

Israel is not the only country that demands recognition as a pre-requisite to peace negotiations.  All countries that engage in treaty negotiations of ANY KIND must mutually recognize the other as a "state" _(those sovereign states that have the ability to ratified)_ pursuant to Article 6 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties; which establishes the capacity to enter into an agreement.

A sovereign state is generally defined to be any nation or people, whatever may be the form of its internal constitution, which governs itself independently of foreign powers.  If it is occupied or otherwise not able to govern itself independently, then there is a question of "capacity."  There is an argument to be made that a territory under occupation not true capable to govern itself.  This argument may apply to the West Bank, but not necessarily to the Gaza Strip.

II. APPLICATION OF THE LO DE JURE TO UN ADMINISTRATION 
The Hague Regulation Article 42’s core threshold for an occupation – “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army [and the] occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised” – has been generally understood by States, courts, and scholars as suggesting that occupation begins and lasts as long as three criteria are met:

(1) foreign forces are physically present in the territory of a State without its consent;
(2) the authorities of the latter State lack the capacity to exercise authority in the territory; and
(3) the foreign forces have the capacity to exercise authority over the territory.​
I hope this answers your questions.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Israel gave the waqf permission to care for the mosque and religious builds on the mount, and the King of Jordan is the protector of the mosque and he determines what happens there.  Most of the construction and digging was not authorized and repairs of the wall have been delayed because the waqf won't let Israel shore up the wall under al aqsa were the wall is weakening.  The threat of collapse is not just a danger to those below but the mosque itself could be damaged or destroyed.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I don't disagree, entirely.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians have a very questionable defined territory. I am not sure they actually have a border control point that is not managed by someone else.​
> Military control (occupation) is quite different than the right to sovereignty.
> 
> That is why it is says the the people have the right to self determination *without external interference.*
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I never miss that point.  I always include the element of "containment."  Why???  Because the Palestinian People are a threat to regional peace and security without the element of containment.  

There are only to types of conflicts.

International and
Non-international
There are twos ways to argue this:

1)  If the conflict is not international, then it is "non-international." There is no "occupation" in a "non-international" conflict because there is no "foreign army."  If it is a "foreign army," then there is an international component.  Foreign Force --- over --- Foreign Territory

2)  You are always invoking the:

colonial domination 
alien occupation and against racist régimes 
exercise of their right of self-determination
These three element are part of PROTOCOL I (International Armed Conflicts).


Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of *International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)*, 8 June 1977.
General principles and scope of application


Article 1 [ Link ] -- General principles and scope of application

1. The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for this Protocol in all circumstances.

2. In cases not covered by this Protocol or by other international agreements, civilians and combatants remain under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from the dictates of public conscience.

3. This Protocol, which supplements the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the protection of war victims, shall apply in the situations referred to in Article 2 [ Link ] common to those Conventions.

4. The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against *colonial domination* and *alien occupation* and against racist régimes in the exercise of their *right of self-determination*, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of *Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II)*, 8 June 1977.
Material field of application


Article 1 [ Link ] -- Material field of application

1. This Protocol, which develops and supplements Article 3 [ Link ] common to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 without modifying its existing conditions of application, shall apply to all armed conflicts which are not covered by Article 1 [ Link ] of the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) and which take place in the territory of a High Contracting Party between its armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups which, under responsible command, exercise such control over a part of its territory as to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military operations and to implement this Protocol.

2. This Protocol shall not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence and other acts of a similar nature, as not being armed conflicts.

I don't care which side you pick, just stick to one side.  There are advantages and disadvantages to both applications.  You generally open with issues that are "international in their complexions.  But you cannot choose those central themes if you are going to claim it is a non-international conflict.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 27, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



syria withdrew from the golan during the war.  UN has a buffer zone between syria and Israel.  Israel went as far as the outskirts of Damascus and did not keep all that land.  The highland is their protection zone.  If Israel has really wanted they could have taken Damascus and much more, but they left that for syria.
Israel did not keep southern Lebanon but handed that back each time.
In an agreement with Egypt they returned the sinai as part of a peace deal.  Israel had gone as far as the canal and nearly to cairo.  If Israel was really this land gab demon, why aren't they in at least half or what we know of as syria, lebanon and still in the sinai?
Israel still control area c of the WB.  the other two have been turned over the to PA.  Israel withdrew from gaza.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I already gave you the link.  But, I'll do it again.



P F Tinmore said:


> It seems that the entirety of the West Bank, by Treaty, is inside the "international boundary" of Israel (although I'm not sure Israel actually wants it).​


*(LINK)*

*Treaty of Peace between the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the State of Israel:*

*Article 3 - International Boundary*

1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan 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 co-ordinates specified therein.

*2. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.

3. The parties recognise 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 nine months after the signing of the Treaty.

5. It is agreed that where the boundary follows a river, in the event of natural changes in the course of the flow of the river as described in Annex I (a), the boundary shall follow the new course of the flow. In the event of any other changes the boundary shall not be affected unless otherwise agreed.

6. Immediately upon the exchange of the instruments of ratification of this Treaty, each Party will deploy on its side of the international boundary as defined in Annex I (a).

7. The Parties shall, upon the signature of the Treaty, enter into negotiations to conclude, within 9 months, an agreement on the delimitation of their maritime boundary in the Gulf of Aqaba.

8. Taking into account the special circumstances of the Naharayim/Baqura area, which is under Jordanian sovereignty, with Israeli private ownership rights, the Parties agreed to apply the provisions set out in Annex I (b).

9. With respect to the Zofar/Al-Ghamr area, the provisions set out in Annex I (c) will apply.​
v/r
R


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Yes, so Israel is occupying territory that doesn't belong to them...

Thanks for the confirmation...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I don't disagree, entirely.
> 
> ...


4. The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against *colonial domination* and *alien occupation* and against racist régimes in the exercise of their *right of self-determination*, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.​
Thank you for proving my point.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I already gave you the link.  But, I'll do it again.
> 
> ...


Indeed, Israel trying to back door borders on land that it has never legally acquired.


----------



## montelatici (Jul 27, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


_
1. Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
_
You have to ask that question?  The Israelis came from Europe, invaded Palestine and evicted most of the non-Jews.  What's to keep them from taking over more territory now that they have effectively taken over or control all of the historical mandate Palestine?  With the nuclear bomb Israel blackmails the rest of the world in letting them do what they want to non-Jews.  The Israelis have not only the Arabs and Muslims with nukes, but the world as a whole.

"The Samson Option – taking out Israel's enemies with it, possibly causing irreparable damage to the entire world – has been floated by Israeli strategists including Ariel Sharon, as a last-ditch option if Israel faces annihilation."

Letter-poem to Grass If We Go Everyone Goes - Jewish World - News - Arutz Sheva


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 27, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza
> 
> Their way of planning for peace????



Dunno, but that should keep 50 Israeli soldiers busy for a week, should war break out...


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 27, 2015)

Bleipriester said:


> Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?



Yeah, Israel said they would "drive the Muzzie Beasts into the sea."

Oh wait.....


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



So who's territory is Israel "occupying"? The British or the Ottomans?  LOL


----------



## montelatici (Jul 27, 2015)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?
> ...



No, they are actually driving the non-Jews out.  They haven't just said it. LOL

*"As Jewish settlements expand, the Palestinians are being driven away"*

*http://www.economist.com/news/middl...lestinians-are-being-driven-away-squeeze-them*


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Read it again!!!!



P F Tinmore said:


> 4. The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against *colonial domination* and *alien occupation* and against racist régimes in the exercise of their *right of self-determination*, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.​
> Thank you for proving my point.


*(COMMENT)*

It applies to an *International Conflict* --- and NOT a non-international conflict.

It counters your point.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Read it again!!!!
> 
> ...


How so?


----------



## Humanity (Jul 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



NOT ISRAEL'S... Thats for sure!

Unless you want to argue with the rest of the world, ICJ, UN, Supreme Court of Israel...

End up looking like one of your comrades... A beaten, broken mess because they tried to argue against a wall of fact!


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


Israel controls the area as a buffer zone between themselves and the barbarians.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Are you aware that Israel does not occupy Gaza'istan or the West Bank?


Then who's preventing humanitarian ships from entering Gaza and who's running the almost 500 roadblocks and checkpoints in the West Bank?

You are one sick puppy!


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Israel controls the area as a buffer zone between themselves and the barbarians.


Israel has no right controlling anything on the Palestinian side of the fence.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Israel controls the area as a buffer zone between themselves and the barbarians.
> ...


Sure they do. Islamic terrorism is controlled by force, not with kafir welfare dollars.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Daniyel said:


> You mean Hamas or Fatah?
> Hamas official we were behind the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers World news The Guardian


You're going to believe a disgruntled, ex-Hamas official?

This story has already been debunked many times over.

The 3 teens were killed by the Mossad.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> You're still comatose, shortstop. You're spending way too much time agonizing over the _Flotilla Escapades_


You can't answer a direct question, can ya, whore?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You're still comatose, shortstop. You're spending way too much time agonizing over the _Flotilla Escapades_
> ...


That's the angry little short man we all know and ridicule.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Sure they do. Islamic terrorism is controlled by force, not with kafir welfare dollars.


If you think you have a right to do whatever you please on someone else's property, then why don't you come over to my house and try to pull that shit on me?  Come on over and try to set up a "buffer zone" in my front yard and see what happens next.  I'll personally show you how wrong that is.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The Jewish acquired the territory most legally.



P F Tinmore said:


> Indeed, Israel trying to back door borders on land that it has never legally acquired.


*(PREVIOUS POSTING)*

As stated previously in *Posting #121:*

*(REFERENCES)*

Israel Declaration of Independence
Israeli Declaration to Append the Application to the United Nations
Application of Israel for admission to membership in the United Nations (A/818)
Favorable Recommendation of the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations, by the UN Security Council
273 (III). Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations
Peace Treaty between The Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Government of the State of Israel
Treaty of Peace between the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the State of Israel
*(COMMENT)*

*I can demonstrate quite easily that Israel is a "state:"*

Established under its *right to self-determination* under the UN guidance proved in the Steps Preparatory to Independence found in General Assembly 181(II).
Wherein the UN made an official and world-wide public press announcement that the GA/RES/181(II) was implemented.
Where by the State of Israel made application for FULL membership to the UN.
Where by the UN Security Council recommended the admission to the UN.
Where by the General Assembly accepted the State of Israel as a FULL member.

*(COMMENT)*

There are a number of ways under international law, to acquire sovereignty, that we previously discussed in Posting #685, Thread "the-humanitarian-gaza-flotillas-saga":

1 Occupation
2 Annexation
3 Accretion
4 Cession
5 Prescription​*SOURCES:  (Oddly enough, the first two posted by Arab Nationals)*

Territorial Acquisition, Disputes, and International Law, By Surya Prakash Sharm, Chapter II  Tradition Modalities of Acquisition (Page 36), The Acquisition of Territory under International Law
Acquisition of Territorial Sovereignty, Posted 24th November 2012 by abdul qadir
Sub-SOURCE:  Acquisition of sovereignty From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Territorial transfers is a sub category of "Cession," as is self-determination.  Transfer is not, by any means, the only way to acquire sovereign territory.  In the case of Israel, the Jewish People used the means of self-determination; augmented by "Prescription" when the Arab League Forces attempted to invade and take by force the sovereign State of Israel.  The Arab League Forces, lost ground to the Israeli defenders and the original territory allocated for the Jewish State expanded. 

While there are many pro-Palestinians that, to this day think, the territory now under sovereign control of the Israelis was not lawfully acquired, that has never been successfully challenged. 

An important ingredient of sovereignty is territoriality, the extension of actual physical control. Territoriality is a principle by which members of a community define themselves.  The Israelis define themselves by the territory they manage to establish and hold control over. It specifies that their citizenship derives from their residence within borders they control without regard to the objection of adjacent Arab Countries that attempted to eject them as a means of external interference to the right of self-determination. It is a powerful principle, for it defines membership in a way that may not correspond with identity. The borders of a sovereign state may not at all circumscribe a “people” or a “nation,” and may in fact encompass several of these identities, as national self-determination and irredentist movements make evident. It is rather by simple virtue of their location within geographic borders that people belong to a state and fall under the authority of its ruler. It is within a geographic territory that modern sovereigns are supremely authoritative.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> That's the angry little short man we all know and ridicule.


Does Social Services know how much of a racist bitch you are?

And why can't you comment on who's running the checkpoints and roadblocks?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> There is no occupation.
> 
> Islamic terrorism can however, occasionally use the support of short- minded, short of stature types to excuse their terrorism.
> 
> When the shooting war starts, the terrorists and their cheerleader cowards flailing their Pom Poms suffer the inevitable smack down.


There's been an occupation for the last 47 years and nothing your racist, barren womb can say, will change that.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Sure they do. Islamic terrorism is controlled by force, not with kafir welfare dollars.
> ...


A keyboard jihadi. Small of stature and short of credibility.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > That's the angry little short man we all know and ridicule.
> ...


Are you still promoting "Palestinian" as a race?

Small thinking from angry, self-hating short boys.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> So, you don't consider continued launching of rockets at  neighboring country a terrorist act or act of war?
> 
> How generous of you to support your Death Cult heroes.


They have a legal right to resist the occupation.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > There is no occupation.
> ...


What occupation would that be?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> A keyboard jihadi. Small of stature and short of credibility.


You don't really set the bar that high, so I wouldn't be talking about someone else's credibility.

Why can't you comment on the 500 roadblocks and checkpoints in the West Bank?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > So, you don't consider continued launching of rockets at  neighboring country a terrorist act or act of war?
> ...


What occupation?

You keep coming up short with answers.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> What occupation would that be?


Go fuck yourself, you little troll.

The occupation is not a debatable issue.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > A keyboard jihadi. Small of stature and short of credibility.
> ...


We'll keep the bar low so you'll feel more comfortable about your limitations.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore, et al,

You have to go back to Posting #165 and read it.  I even highlighted the applicable phrase.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...



*(COMMENT)*

Protocol I deals with "International Conflicts" that include:

*colonial domination* and
*alien occupation*
*right of self-determination*,
Protocol II deals with "Non-international Conflicts" that do not include these issues.

I have embedded the links (in blue) in that post.  You may read it at your leisure. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > What occupation would that be?
> ...


It's debatable. You're just on the short end of any ability to compose coherent sentences.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Are you still promoting "Palestinian" as a race?
> 
> Small thinking from angry, self-hating short boys.


I have to admit, you bring down a thread better than most.

But you're a perfect example of a Zionist asshole.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> It's debatable. You're just on the short end of any ability to compose coherent sentences.


That's a moot point, because you don't respond to any.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's debatable. You're just on the short end of any ability to compose coherent sentences.
> ...


You do better with short, pointless commentary.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The Jewish acquired the territory most legally.
> 
> ...


So, which one of these five methods do you believe is applicable?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> You have to go back to Posting #165 and read it.  I even highlighted the applicable phrase.
> 
> ...


Those are dead links so I can't determine what you are saying.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



I asked you a simple question. You Pali Nazi supporters keep braying that Israel is "occupying", so who's land was it that Israel occupied / captured / conquered at the time?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



I asked him her it "who's land was it that Israel occupied" and the response was "not Israel's!". In other words he she it doesn't want to face the wall of facts. LOL.


----------



## Daniyel (Jul 27, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > You mean Hamas or Fatah?
> ...


Mashal Hamas was behind murder of three Israeli teens - Israel News Ynetnews
Hamas official admits group murdered 3 Israeli teens RT News
Hamas Admits To Kidnapping And Killing Israeli Teens NPR
Mashaal admits Hamas members killed Israeli teens The Times of Israel
Claim that Hamas killed 3 teens is turning out to be the WMD of Gaza onslaught Mondoweiss
Hamas official we were behind the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers World news The Guardian
Israeli forces kill two Hamas members suspected in kidnapping killing of 3 teens - The Washington Post
Hamas claims responsibility for three Israeli teens kidnapping and murder - - Haaretz Daily Newspaper Israel News
The Jerusalem Post
Hamas admits kidnapping 3 Israeli teens in West Bank - CBS News
Israel-Gaza conflict Hamas official admits military wing was behind kidnapping of teenagers - Middle East - World - The Independent
Gaza War Hamas Admits Kidnapping Three Israeli Teens - NBC News
Netanyahu Hamas Will Pay For The Killing Of 3 Israeli Teens - Business Insider

*
Not only multiple Hamas officials claimed responsibility but Hamas didn't even tried to disprove those claims.
*
You might also be able to also explain why?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 27, 2015)

there can never be peace with Hamas animals:


----------



## Humanity (Jul 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



Here endeth the 'debate' on occupied territory...

If you two numbskulls still believe there is no occupation you need to seek some serious psychiatric help!

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pr=71&code=mwp&p1=3&p2=4&p3=6
https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/review/2012/irrc-885-kretzmer.pdf


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


So silly. This is the same UN you Islamo-converts use to claim that the Israelis are oppressors of Pali women. 

What a bunch of whiners.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> I asked him her it "who's land was it that Israel occupied" and the response was "not Israel's!". In other words he she it doesn't want to face the wall of facts. LOL.


The definition of an "occupation", is occupying land you have no clear title to. 

So it doesn't matter who's land it is, it only matters that it is_* "not Israel's".*_


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> So silly. This is the same UN you Islamo-converts use to claim that the Israelis are oppressors of Pali women.
> 
> What a bunch of whiners.


There isn't a single country on the planet that agrees with you.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > So silly. This is the same UN you Islamo-converts use to claim that the Israelis are oppressors of Pali women.
> ...


There's not a single, useless slogan you won't use to press your rabid Jooooooo hatreds...... Shortstop.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Daniyel said:


> Mashal Hamas was behind murder of three Israeli teens - Israel News Ynetnews
> Hamas official admits group murdered 3 Israeli teens RT News
> Hamas Admits To Kidnapping And Killing Israeli Teens NPR
> Mashaal admits Hamas members killed Israeli teens The Times of Israel
> ...


Dude, that's the same story over and over.  And it's all based on the testimony of someone the Israeli's tortured during interrogations.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > I asked him her it "who's land was it that Israel occupied" and the response was "not Israel's!". In other words he she it doesn't want to face the wall of facts. LOL.
> ...


I'll correct your short sighted ability at coherent commentary: The land *is not Islamic terrorists'*


----------



## Humanity (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



If you bothered to read the links...

International Court of Justice
Supreme Court of Israel

No UN in sight!

Why would there be a "claim" that Israel is an oppressor? 

No claim required... It's been proven!


----------



## Humanity (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Correct. It's land given to Palestinians!


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> There's not a single, useless slogan you won't use to press your rabid Jooooooo hatreds...... Shortstop.


That's not a slogan, it's a fact.

And why would I hate Jews?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


Re-read that the next time you're at the mosque for terrorist training. There's no occupation of Gaza.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > There's not a single, useless slogan you won't use to press your rabid Jooooooo hatreds...... Shortstop.
> ...


Why do you hate Joooooos?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> I'll correct your short sighted ability at coherent commentary: The land *is not Islamic terrorists'*


All that matters is, it is not Israel's and they need to get the fuck off it.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Re-read that the next time you're at the mosque for terrorist training. There's no occupation of Gaza.


If there's no occupation, then what is stopping the humanitarian ships?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Why do you hate Joooooos?


I don't.  Why do you think I do?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I'll correct your short sighted ability at coherent commentary: The land *is not Islamic terrorists'*
> ...


False, shorty. It proves the Arab/Moslem terrorist beggars and squatters must go.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you hate Joooooos?
> ...


You do. Why do you?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> False, shorty. It proves the Arab/Moslem terrorist beggars and squatters must go.


They're not squatters. 

Even the Balfour Declaration disagrees with you.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> You do. Why do you?


If you think I do, then explain why?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You do. Why do you?
> ...


Why not explain your insensate Jooooo hatreds?

Go on.......


How does that make you feel?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > False, shorty. It proves the Arab/Moslem terrorist beggars and squatters must go.
> ...


They're squatters. Egyptian, Syrian, Lebanese squatters. Even their nations of origin disagree with you.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Why not explain your insensate Jooooo hatreds?
> 
> Go on.......
> 
> ...


I'm not the one making the claim.  You are.  You mean to tell me, you can't explain why you said what you said?  So you just say things for no apparent reason whatsoever?  Interesting.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Wow, it's like trying to deal with a silly, ignorant child...

Let's try again shall we...

Yes Hollie, you are correct, there is no occupation of Gaza, well done...

I have not said, nor posted any links to try and say that Gaza is occupied Hollie...

I have stated and given you irrefutable proof Hollie, that WB, Golan and East Jerusalem are occupied by Israel...

Now shall we end this boring, silly denial of occupation, come back to the real world and move on Hollie


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> They're squatters. Egyptian, Syrian, Lebanese squatters. Even their nations of origin disagree with you.


Then provide the links that say that.

And while you're unable to do that, here's the official  land records of 1948, showing Arabs owning 90% of the land in Palestine.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Let's explore that.
> 
> Go on....
> 
> Is this related to your feelings of inferiority due to your short stature?


I have no clue as to what you're talking about.  All I see, is someone who can't backup the things they say.


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


I've not seen that "irrefutable pwoof". If Gaza is occupied, there must be some indication of the occupiers. 

The only occupiers I can see are the beggars and squatters who have an entire UN agency dedicated to the maintenance of an invented people with an invented identity.

Your silly cliches' and slogans have an accepting audience at your mosque  but outside of that Islamo-terrorist training facility..... get real, sweetie.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 28, 2015)

Hollie said:


> I'd have to point out your claims of "occupation" to delineate your cluelessness.


Then explain why its not occupied? 

Explain if there is no occupation, who's stopping humanitarian vessels from reaching Gaza?  Explain who is operating the almost 500 checkpoints and roadblocks in the West Bank, if its not occupied?

C'mon troll, set yourself apart from the rest of the_* "troller nation",*_ answer a question.


----------



## amineaouaq (Jul 28, 2015)

Speech by US President Barack Obama in the July 25, 2015 
Watch Full Video :

Speech by US President Barack Obama in the July 25 2015 LIFE STYLE







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


I wouldn't call it an "occupation", more like keeping a short leash on the islamist terrorist syndicate.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > I asked him her it "who's land was it that Israel occupied" and the response was "not Israel's!". In other words he she it doesn't want to face the wall of facts. LOL.
> ...



So who's land was it that Israel "occupied"?  I love it, bigmouth can't answer a simple question.  Ha ha ha.  It wasn't the Pali's either.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Tryeth that again.  Your link doesn't say who's land it was that Israel occupied. What's the matter?  You don't know?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > Mashal Hamas was behind murder of three Israeli teens - Israel News Ynetnews
> ...



Wrong again dude.  It's all true.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



Still doesn't say who's land it was that Israel "occupied".


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I'll correct your short sighted ability at coherent commentary: The land *is not Islamic terrorists'*
> ...



It matters because it wasn't Palestinian land, ever.  Like never, ever, ever, dude.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > False, shorty. It proves the Arab/Moslem terrorist beggars and squatters must go.
> ...



Well, who's land was it that Israel occupied?  Is the reason you refuse to provide a straight answer because it wasn't the Palestinians?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



Bzzzzzz wrong. Golan was Syrian territory captured when the animals attacked Israel.  It will remain Israeli territory for the foreseeable future.  West Bank and Gaza were actually Egyptian and Jordanian territory, which they OCCUPIED for 20 years from 1948 to 1967.  How come nobody mentioned this mythical "Palestine" back then?  Instead they used those same territories to try to launch a fatal attack on Israel.


----------



## Humanity (Jul 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



I would expect a little better from you Roodboy... Playing the dumbass is not like you at all... Maybe being influenced by "Hollie"!

I didn't post the links to show that the occupied land is owned by others, simply that it is occupied!

Proof enough!


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



What's the matter? Goat bit your tongue?  You can't answer who's land it was that Israel occupied?


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, I get an error code as well.



P F Tinmore said:


> You have to go back to Posting #165 and read it.  I even highlighted the applicable phrase.
> 
> Those are dead links so I can't determine what you are saying.


*(COMMENT)*

GOTO the ICRC SITE and then follow the links and *Select ARTICLE I* for both Protocols:


Additional Protocol (I) to the Geneva Conventions, 1977 and its commentary
*General principles and scope of application = Article I*

Additional Protocol (II) to the Geneva Conventions, 1977 and its commentary
*Material field of application = Article I*


These links will help you distinguish the difference between what is considered an "International Conflict" and what is an "Non-International Conflict."


NOTE:  I tested the links here.  The two *BOLDED LINKS* will take you directly to the cut'n'paste.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hollie (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


That was quite the backstroke. Typical.

You terrorist huggers are quick to accuse Israel of some alleged occupation yet you grant an exemption to Arab-moslem beggars and squatters who occupied the land after the collapse of the Ottoman conquerors. 

Such phony and selective claims of "occupation". Pass that on to your imam.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Let's see. Palestine is defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the native population and they are citizens of Palestine.

Huuumpf! The land must belong to a bunch of criminals out of Europe.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

It was Ottoman land for 700 years, then after WWI when the Germans and Ottomans were defeated, it fell under the British control.  The Arabs refused the partition because they preferred to destroy the Jewish state and attacked Israel in 1948, NOT to create this mythical "Palestine, but simply to destroy the Jewish state and divide it among themselves.  Although they were defeated, Jordan and Egypt managed to capture the West Bank and Gaza and occupy it for 20 years, again, no mention of this mythical "Palestine", by anybody.  They attacked Israel in 1967 again, NOT to create this mythical Palestine, but to destroy the Jewish state, and failed again. This time loosing the West Bank and Gaza since they launched their attacks from those territories. So Israel simply got back what was supposed to be their's which coincidentally, is ancient Jewish holy lands.  Yes...the "Palestinian cause" is a hoax.

True story.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



Arabs suddenly calling themselves Palestinians doesn't make a people, nation, or identity.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



The Palestinians are not the native population.  Even an Hamas member said recently that most Palestinians have Egyptian surnames.  Churchill said that many Arabs crowded into Palestine at about the same time that Jewish refugees from Europe and the Arab countries came there.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


My grandparents were from Scotland, England, and Germany. Does that mean that I am not American?

Churchill? You are going to believe a lying, racist, drunk?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


They became Palestinians by international and domestic law after WWI.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Checkmate.  My Israeli cousins have grandparents from Europe as well, just like you yourself.  Yet you are saying that they're not Israeli, and the State of Israel doesn't exist.  So why do you have the right to be American and not European, while my cousins don't have the right to be Israeli and not European.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 28, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



If you move back to Europe, and say that you regret having invaded Vietnam, you would have more of a case against Israel.


----------



## Daniyel (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > Mashal Hamas was behind murder of three Israeli teens - Israel News Ynetnews
> ...


Those are actually different reports of the same story, first link is by Khaled Masha'al head of Hamas, the one in the Qatari Jacuzzi, second one was the case where you claim this is ex Hamas member that was totured (what?), next there is the report of a closed "conference in Turkey by Hamas officials, and you can also find a report says Israel's intelligence sources claimed.
4 Different sources, where not a single one mentioned the Mossad, however since you insist I'm still wondering why Hamas never tried to disprove any of those claims?(not to mention why they praised them)


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


My grandparents came to the US to be US citizens.

Did your relatives go to Palestine to be Palestinian citizens as specified in the Mandate?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, I get an error code as well.
> 
> ...


Rocco, this is all I could find that is relevant.

1.1 Definitions

1.1.1 Non-international armed conflict
a. Non-international armed conflicts are armed confrontations
occurring within the territory of a single State and in which the
armed forces of no other State are engaged against the central
government.

http://www.iihl.org/iihl/Documents/The Manual on the Law of NIAC.pdf

The entire conflict is in Palestine. That is why I say it is not an international conflict.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

For four millennium (plus) lands and borders --- countries and empires --- kingdoms and governments, have evolved and changed in leadership, sizes and shapes.  What once was the Garden of Eden (Book of Genesis) once believed situated at the head of the Persian Gulf, where the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers run into the sea, is now the apex of several Arab/Persian states, still fighting amongst themselves today as they were 2000 years ago.



P F Tinmore said:


> What's the matter? Goat bit your tongue?  You can't answer who's land it was that Israel occupied?


Let's see. Palestine is defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the native population and they are citizens of Palestine.

Huuumpf! The land must belong to a bunch of criminals out of Europe.[/QUOTE]
*(COMMENT)*

The territories and boundaries are historically changing with time and the migration of people.  Palestine, as was defined by the Allied Powers at the end of WWI, also changed.  what we call Palestine today _(by that ancient regional name)_ must have been know by several names since the time of the Canaanites 2000 years BCE. 

Palestinian in the time of Ham and Joshua, was an unknown and undefined plot then as it is still argued today.  

International borders are "man-made."  This is true, particularly in the Middle East and Persian Gulf regions, as well as Africa.  One needs only look at the map and you will see all the straight line segments that make-up the borders.  Before the outbreak of the American Civil War, everything from Tunis _(North Africa)_ to Kuwait _(Court of Sheikhs on the Persian Gulf)_, and from Kuwait to Belgrade _(Serbia) _was under the Ottoman Empire.  Little old Palestine was a regional name divided up among the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem _(AKA: Sanjak of Jerusalem --- Ottoman special administrative status)_ and the Vilayet's of Beirut and Syria.  It wasn't even completely under the same Imperial subdivision of the Sultan.

Just as the all the rest of the lands, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf, evolved, so did that little space known by some as Palestine.  But your concept of Palestinian International Borders is completely skewed and distorted.  The border of which you speak were established by the Allied Powers based, not on the domain of a specific inhabitance, but based on the decisions made by two Allied Power _(France and Britain)_.  The agreement for divide the region was not made on the basis of the enemy inhabitance, but by two Allied Power Civil Servants _(Sir Mark Sykes of Britain and François Georges-Picot)_, and the borders were drawn, not on the basis of the inhabitance, but on the survey made by a Joint British and French Surveyor Teams.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

This is the same foundational concept.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


(COMMENT)

If you claim the entire conflict is in the regional area of Palestine, as defined by the Allied Powers, then, none of this applies:


colonial domination
alien occupation and against racist régimes
exercise of their right of self-determination
This are international conflict issues under the General Principles Article 1(4) Protocol I to the Geneva Convention.  

Like I said before, I don't care if you call it a NIAC or a IAC.  But you cannot mix apples and oranges.  Colonial domination, alien occupation and self-determination are IAC issue --- NOT NAIC.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> For four millennium (plus) lands and borders --- countries and empires --- kingdoms and governments, have evolved and changed in leadership, sizes and shapes.  What once was the Garden of Eden (Book of Genesis) once believed situated at the head of the Persian Gulf, where the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers run into the sea, is now the apex of several Arab/Persian states, still fighting amongst themselves today as they were 2000 years ago.
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The territories and boundaries are historically changing with time and the migration of people.  Palestine, as was defined by the Allied Powers at the end of WWI, also changed.  what we call Palestine today _(by that ancient regional name)_ must have been know by several names since the time of the Canaanites 2000 years BCE.

Palestinian in the time of Ham and Joshua, was an unknown and undefined plot then as it is still argued today. 

International borders are "man-made."  This is true, particularly in the Middle East and Persian Gulf regions, as well as Africa.  One needs only look at the map and you will see all the straight line segments that make-up the borders.  Before the outbreak of the American Civil War, everything from Tunis _(North Africa)_ to Kuwait _(Court of Sheikhs on the Persian Gulf)_, and from Kuwait to Belgrade _(Serbia) _was under the Ottoman Empire.  Little old Palestine was a regional name divided up among the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem _(AKA: Sanjak of Jerusalem --- Ottoman special administrative status)_ and the Vilayet's of Beirut and Syria.  It wasn't even completely under the same Imperial subdivision of the Sultan.

Just as the all the rest of the lands, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf, evolved, so did that little space known by some as Palestine.  But your concept of Palestinian International Borders is completely skewed and distorted.  The border of which you speak were established by the Allied Powers based, not on the domain of a specific inhabitance, but based on the decisions made by two Allied Power _(France and Britain)_.  The agreement for divide the region was not made on the basis of the enemy inhabitance, but by two Allied Power Civil Servants _(Sir Mark Sykes of Britain and François Georges-Picot)_, and the borders were drawn, not on the basis of the inhabitance, but on the survey made by a Joint British and French Surveyor Teams. 

Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
Indeed.

And the habitual residents of the respective successor states became nationals and citizens of those states.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> This is the same foundational concept.
> 
> ...


Israel is unique in history because the alien occupation and colonial domination were accomplished by foreign non state actors.

There is no "foreign state" it all took place inside Palestine


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Palestine is a European word for the region.  The land was never called Palestine during the 700 years under Ottoman rule.  People who lived or migrated there after the WWI were British subjects of the Palestine Mandate.  They held. Ritish Passports. Even then, the so called Palestinians considered themselves ARABS, not Palestinians, as Palestinian referred to the Jews of the region who had migrated there during the Ottoman Empire and before. The word Palestinian is a name the Arabs hijacked later on in order to create this fake identity for Arab invaders and refugees created as a result of the wars the neighboring Arabs had started.  An idea brought about by their Egyptian born and raised terrorist leader and founder Arafat.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 28, 2015)

montelatici said:


> [
> No, they are actually driving the non-Jews out.  They haven't just said it. LOL
> 
> *"As Jewish settlements expand, the Palestinians are being driven away"*
> ...



Then why are their more Arabs in the area than ever before?

And do you deny that you Muslims have vowed to drive the Jews into the sea?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...



Not so, the entire Middle East was Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were defeated after WWI and the Middle East was divided into Muslim lands ruled by Muslims. Arab rulers were brought from various countries and put in place as rulers of other newly formed countries. Israel which consisted of less than 1% of the land the given to Muslims, was designated to be the Jewish state. Arabs had no problems with Saudi rulers being imported to rule countries like Jordan, because they were Muslims.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 28, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Israel has no right controlling anything on the Palestinian side of the fence.



You poor Muzzie Beasts - you only have 99.9% of the land mass in the Middle East. What an outrage that those greedy Jews won't give you their tiny sliver of land...


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Israel has no right controlling anything on the Palestinian side of the fence.
> ...


This conflict has always been and will always be about Muslim intolerance and violence toward others.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Neither does American, British, French, German, Polish, Russian Jewish Zionists suddenly calling themselves "Israelis"


----------



## Challenger (Jul 28, 2015)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Israel has no right controlling anything on the Palestinian side of the fence.
> ...



It's not their tiny sliver of land land to give or have, never has been.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


This conflict has always been and will always be about Zionist intolerance and violence toward others.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, the habitual residents became citizens of the Mandate Territory as did the residents of all the sounding residents of the various mandates.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


Indeed.

And the habitual residents of the respective successor states became nationals and citizens of those states.[/QUOTE]

*(COMMENT)*

Pursuant to the Palestinian Order in Council and the Citizenship Order.  Having said that, it still does not give the Palestinians any special status; nor the territory any special connection to the Arab citizens.  The right of self-determination, that came into effect with the UN Charter still applies.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore,

For the umph-teenth time!



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Palestine you describe was not then, and is not now, and never in between, a self-governing state.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 28, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,
> 
> For the umph-teenth time!
> 
> ...


Indeed, but self governing is not a criterion for inalienable rights.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



True.  They started calling themselves Israelis after the state of Israel was established and recognized internationally in 1948.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 28, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



It belonged to the Ottomans, who allowed the Jews to migrate there during their 700 year rule of the land, and then fell under control of the British.  So the Arab invaders had very little to say about what happens to the the land.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 28, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



It was Jewish in the past, ruled over by 45 kings and one queen, and it is CERTAINLY theirs now, just like whatever country you're living in, is yours.  What arrogance!!


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 28, 2015)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Israel has no right controlling anything on the Palestinian side of the fence.
> ...



Exactly.  Like one comedian said:  "It's like some person who owns a football field, and there's someone in there with a matchbox.  He says the matchbox is really his.  And he's not even willing to settle for half the matchbox."


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore, et al,

We are not talking about "inalienable" rights.  We are talking about which *laws* are applicable.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

This makes a difference in questions of jurisdiction and the application of the law in legal systems and courts.  This is way, when you look-up certain Customary International Humanitarian Laws, it stipulates whether the applicable environment is IAC or NAIC.

In the case of Arab-Israeli (A-I) Conflict and your position (which you are not the sole advocate - there are many pro-Palestinians that legitimately argue your point), there are a couple of views that can be taken (including yours).  But other perspectives include the NAIC elements of:

A *war of independence* is a conflict occurring over a territory that has declared independence.
A *civil war* is a war between organized groups within the same country; or --- between two countries created from a formerly united state.​Another view to this discussion is the duration and temporal origin.  If the A-I Conflict is considered to be an extension of the 1948-49 War, in which multiple Arab States intervened with with elements of their respective armed forces on the side or another in a non-international armed conflict, it is generally understood that this does not change the qualification of the conflict.

The opposing argument is that an armed conflict confined geographically to the territory of a single territory can, however, be qualified as international if a foreign state intervenes with its armed forces on the side of the rebels fighting against government forces.  This argument comes into play when it is considered that at the time of the 1967 Conflict, in which there was an Armistice in place between Israel and Jordan, in which Jordan fired on Israel first, and Israel entered the West Bank (sovereign Jordanian territory), the conflict then shifts from being NIAC --- to --- IAC.

The reason and importance for the distinction:

THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 31:927]  Page 928:
"Apart from their concern for sovereignty, governments are reluctant to assume, during non-international armed conflict, legal obligations that require them to apply international rules relevant to the combatants' privilege and prisoner of war status. Under both customary and conventional law applicable in international armed conflict, prisoner of war status derives from the combatants' privilege. This privilege grants members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict immunity from criminal prosecution for legitimate acts of war. Combatants' privilege does not apply to war crimes.2 Thus, the combatants' privilege is a license to kill, maim, or kidnap enemy combatants; destroy military objectives; and cause unavoidable civilian casualties. Governments are unwilling to concur in any rule of international law that would require them to grant their enemies immunity from treason or to grant them a license to attack the government's security personnel and property, subject only to honorable internment as prisoners of war for the duration of the conflict. Such unwillingness was the principal reason for the failure to include in both the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Protocols international armed conflict rules applicable to large-scale civil wars. 3
_2. See E. DE VATrEL, THE LAW OF NATIONS 280 (L. White trans. 1792); H. GRoTIUS, COMMENTARY ON THE LAW OF PRIZE AND BOOTY 42,45,68,81 (G. Williams trans. 1604), reprintedrn 22 THE CLASSICS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW I (Scott ed. 1950); OFFICE OF JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL, U.S. DEP'T OF WAR, Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, General Orders, No. 100, 1863, art. 57, in THE MILITARY LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES 1074 app., 1082 (4th ed. 1901 & Supp. 1911) (the Lieber code); Netherlands Law Concerning Trials of War Criminals in 11 UNITED NATIONS WAR CRIMES COMMISSION, LAw REPORTS OF TRIALS OF WAR CRIMINALS 86 (1949). 

3. DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE OF GENEVA, 2A FINAL RECORD, 322 (1949); DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE OF GENEVA, 2B FINAL RECORD, 44,49-50, 76-77 (1949); 1 INT'L COMM. OF THE RED CROSS, REPORT ON THE CONFERENCE OF GOVERNMENT EXPERTS para. 2.336, at 98 (1972); Protocol II, supra note 1, art. 1(a)._

When Does the Combatant’s Privilege Apply?
by Jens David Ohlin
For some, the entire discussion of the privilege of combatancy is misplaced because the privilege only applies in international armed conflicts (IAC), and never in non-international armed conflicts (NIAC). Under this well-known view, the concept of “combatant” is an element of the legal structure of IAC, and has no place in NIAC, which includes government forces and rebels.  Allegedly, to talk of privileged or unprivileged combatants in NIAC is to make a category mistake.​The point here is, that for the pro-Palestinian to take the view that the A-I Conflict is an NIAC is taking a legal risk; both in Customary application of IHL and the application of code before the ICC.  Remember, if it is determined that it is entirely within the Palestinian Order in Council defined boundaries, then there is no real international occupation.  Both sets of forces originate from the same within the same boundary.  If, as you claim, that the Palestinians are conducting operations entirely within Palestine, then Israel is conducting operations within its those same boundaries, under the same citizenship granted by the Allied Powers.

You simply cannot have it both ways.  It cannot be the case that Rockets fired into Israel is not international, but then claim Israel is a foreign force when they all come from within the same boundary.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## fanger (Jul 28, 2015)

Israeli's wont settle for one 
half of Jerusalem


----------



## fanger (Jul 28, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> We are not talking about "inalienable" rights.  We are talking about which *laws* are applicable.
> 
> ...



When you bring _*your*_ Laws to tell me what rights *I *have, I'll meet you halfway, with a Gun


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 28, 2015)

Humanity said:


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



Land 'given' to palestinians?  Israel tried.  PA controls much of the WB and hamas took gaza by force from the PA.
Israel withdrew from gaza for the sake of peace.
Land that was offered to the palestinians by the UN was refused.  Anything after than they have to come to some agreement with Israel to hand over.  No land it their's by right.  It was turned down.  Jordan took, egypt took, bother handed over the land to Israel, not to palestinians.
If palestinians want any land or state they have to sign an agreement with Israel for it.  Nothing is their's without an agreement.
Israel has tried three times in good faith to help the palestinians establish a state but they were turned down.
They don't care about a state as much as they care about the destruction of Israel.  Arafat and Abbas could have signed an agreement with Israel. Now it will be up to Erakat if palestinians are serious about a state and peace.  Peace, that is the price for statehood.  That is the price they are not fully committed to pay.  They can't even form a unity government so who is going to negotiate with Israel for a state?


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> It was Ottoman land for 700 years, then after WWI when the Germans and Ottomans were defeated, it fell under the British control.  The Arabs refused the partition because they preferred to destroy the Jewish state and attacked Israel in 1948, NOT to create this mythical "Palestine, but simply to destroy the Jewish state and divide it among themselves.  Although they were defeated, Jordan and Egypt managed to capture the West Bank and Gaza and occupy it for 20 years, again, no mention of this mythical "Palestine", by anybody.  They attacked Israel in 1967 again, NOT to create this mythical Palestine, but to destroy the Jewish state, and failed again. This time loosing the West Bank and Gaza since they launched their attacks from those territories. So Israel simply got back what was supposed to be their's which coincidentally, is ancient Jewish holy lands.  Yes...the "Palestinian cause" is a hoax.
> 
> True story.



when the offer of a state was given to the palestinians, it was refused.  The land did not belong to anyone.  Jordan and Egypt occupied the land and Jordan annexed it.  Later both turned the land over to Israel as part of a peace agreement.

Statehood for palestinians is conditional on peace agreement which they are not willing to sign.  Do they really want a state?  They need a unity government to negotiate for that state and they can't even do that.

Palestinians are not ready for statehood, yet.  Israel has tried and turned down.  The one thing Israel will not do in the process of trying to help the palestinians achieve a state is commit suicide.  The will not leave themselves vulnerable.  Peace is the price of palestinian statehood.  Till then it is not their land.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 28, 2015)

fanger, et al,

Humm, yes.  This is a position that many pro-Palestinians claim under their victimization ploy.  The use of threats and coercion.



fanger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore, et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I'm not sure I know who you are, andI'm quite sure you have know idea who I am.  But let their be no mistake:


There are very few "rights" that I have every claimed the Palestinians not to have.  In fact, in this most recent exchange, I have not talked about "rights" at all.  I've talked about the applicability of laws.

In the past, I have indicated that the Palestinian don't have the "right" to "use any and all means" to intimidate and coerce the Israelis (or allies) to support a political position.  AND I have always opposed the idea that the pro-Palestinians have the "right" to actions counter to the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States; especially the in their international relations that threaten and use of force against the territorial integrity of political independent State of Israel.  

I do not believe that the Palestinian and the pro-Palestinian have any "right" to the use of coercion aimed against the political independence or territorial integrity of any State, to include Israel.

I am quite sure no Palestinians and pro-Palestinians have the "right" to support, actively or passively, to entities _(HAMAS, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the al-Qassam Brigades, etc)_ or persons involved in terrorist acts, that support or promote the incitement to terrorism,  support the recruitment of members of terrorist groups, and further the covert supply of weapons to terrorists.  ​
If there is any member that wish to challenge any of these notions; please feel free.  If any member thinks that any of these notions are morally or intellectually improper or unsound, don't hesitate to disagree with me.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Jul 28, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> fanger, et al,
> 
> Humm, yes.  This is a position that many pro-Palestinians claim under their victimization ploy.  The use of threats and coercion.
> 
> ...





*General Assembly*
Distr.
GENERAL









 A/RES/33/24
29 November 1978

" 2. _Reaffirms_ the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;"

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 28, 2015)

montelatici,  P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, as I've said before, I've seen this before.  This is NOT LAW and this is non-binding.  AND, this is not applicable to the question of Palestine, as it violates the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States [A/RES/25/2625 (XXV)]; and the Customary International Humanitarian Law, and Article 2(4) of the UN Charter:


4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.  ​


montelatici said:


> [
> 
> *General Assembly*
> Distr.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Furthermore, this is a concept dealing with IACs (International Armed Conflicts), as it deals directly with a threat posed by "foreign domination and foreign occupation."  If you have been following the discussion closely, you will note that  P F Tinmore's argument is that the Arab-Israeli Conflict is that it is a NIAC (Non-International Armed Conflict).


P F TINMORE Posting #80:  "You are basing your post on the false premise that this is an international conflict."
P F TINMORE Posting 260:  "The entire conflict is in Palestine. That is why I say it is not an international conflict."
P F TINMORE Posting 264:  "Israel is unique in history because the alien occupation and colonial domination were accomplished by foreign non state actors.  There is no "foreign state" it all took place inside Palestine."​
There are several differences between a IAC and a NAIC.  Four of them are:


*II. APPLICATION OF THE LO DE JURE TO UN ADMINISTRATION* (Page 96 and 97, ICRC Occupation and Other Forms of Administration of Foreign Territory)
The Hague Regulation Article 42’s core threshold for an occupation – “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army [and the] occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised” – has been generally understood by States, courts, and scholars as suggesting that occupation begins and lasts as long as three criteria are met:

(1) foreign forces are physically present in the territory of a State without its consent;
(2) the authorities of the latter State lack the capacity to exercise authority in the territory; and
(3) the foreign forces have the capacity to exercise authority over the territory.​
AND  These three issues are covered under  Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of *International Armed Conflicts (IAC) (Protocol I)*, 8 June 1977. *General principles and scope of application  Article 1(4)*

Colonial Domination
Alien Occupation and against racist régimes
Exercise of their Right of Self-determination
These issues are not covered under Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of *Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II)*, 8 June 1977. * Material field of application Article 1*

"Non-International Armed Conflicts within the Meaning of Common Article 3 Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties". These include armed conflicts in which one or more non-governmental armed groups are involved. Depending on the situation, hostilities may occur between governmental armed forces and non-governmental armed groups or between such groups only. As the four Geneva Conventions have universally been ratified now, the requirement that the armed conflict must occur "in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties" has lost its importance in practice. Indeed, any armed conflict between governmental armed forces and armed groups or between such groups cannot but take place on the territory of one of the Parties to the Convention."​
If, as P F Tinmore says, the Arab-Israeli Conflict (limited to the Palestinians) is an example of a NIAC, then your reference _(even if it had strength behind it)_ would not be applicable because it deals with "foreign domination and foreign occupation;" by definition an IAC.  _(See International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Opinion Paper, March 2008)_

It is not unusual to see different Palestinian Factions formulate arguments that work against one another.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Jul 28, 2015)

"Yes, as I've said before, I've seen this before. This is NOT LAW and this is non-binding."

It is no more or less binding than the partition of Palestine.  It is international law. So feck off.  I am tired of your bullshit.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jul 28, 2015)

montelatici said:


> "Yes, as I've said before, I've seen this before. This is NOT LAW and this is non-binding."
> 
> It is no more or less binding than the partition of Palestine.  It is international law. So feck off.  I am tired of your bullshit.


"_Mister Marshall has made his decision. Now, let him enforce it_."

Translation: "That, and $3.50, will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks."

A hand fulla nuthin'...


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 29, 2015)

Uncensored2008 said:


> You poor Muzzie Beasts - you only have 99.9% of the land mass in the Middle East. What an outrage that those greedy Jews won't give you their tiny sliver of land...


What are you talking about?  I live in SoCal.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> This conflict has always been and will always be about Muslim intolerance and violence toward others.


And you're such a beacon of tolerance...


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> It was Jewish in the past, ruled over by 45 kings and one queen, and it is CERTAINLY theirs now, just like whatever country you're living in, is yours.  What arrogance!!


I don't agree with you, but I dig your candor.

Why can't others be this honest?


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Established in 1948, true. Being a member of the UN however, does not automatically infer recognition as a state.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Uncensored2008 said:
> ...



Only according to a propaganda tract created by religious extremists returning from having been exiled. Outside Bible/Torah mumbo-jumbo, there is scant evidence, both archaeological and historical, to suggest that Judaism was anything more than one of several religions competing for followers amongst the general population of the region. The arrogance comes from those so wrapped up in their petty religious beliefs they are incapable of considering objective evidence. Faith is for the feeble minded.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ...Faith is for the feeble minded.


Remember that, when you're preparing to draw your last conscious breath.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of your fellow human beings disagree with your position in this matter.

We all understand how vastly superior atheists are, with intellects vastly outpacing those of mere mortals who believe in a godhead.

Or, more accurately, we all understand that atheists oftentimes see themselves in such terms.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 29, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> fanger, et al,
> 
> Humm, yes.  This is a position that many pro-Palestinians claim under their victimization ploy.  The use of threats and coercion.
> 
> ...


Co-operation among States; especially the in their international relations that threaten and use of force against the *territorial integrity* of political independent State of Israel.​
I have previously asked you to confirm Israel's right to territorial integrity and you have always ducked the question.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > It was Jewish in the past, ruled over by 45 kings and one queen, and it is CERTAINLY theirs now, just like whatever country you're living in, is yours.  What arrogance!!
> ...



I was speaking about Israel proper, within the 1967 lines, which everyone agrees is Israel.  Extremists don't even accept that, like monte and Tinmore.  At least you and pbel and Humanity concede that point.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > fanger, et al,
> ...



Rocco has answered the question numerous times, including citing the treaties with Egypt and Jordan.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ...Faith is for the feeble minded.
> ...



I dare you to watch this:


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



This has nothing to do with faith, even.  You said that Israel was never Jewish in the past.  If Gd spoke to Abraham or gave the Torah at Mount Sinai or split the Reed Sea, is a matter of faith.  That is not what I was saying.  Numerous archaeological findings, such as inscriptions on tablets by Egyptian, Assyrian and Sumerian kings say, without doubt, that there was a Kingdom of Judah in the past.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



And even if you dismiss the Bible entirely despite all the evidence, what about the later Hasmonean Kingdom of Judea?  That is certainly supported by historians, such as Josephus.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



There are only 8 archaelogical inscriptions which mention in passing words that could be translated as "Israel"; one of which says that Israel was "exterminated". There is no consensus regarding who or what the word "Israel" refers to; a region, a tribal group, a petty warlord, etc. As for the "Kingdom of Judah" there is no archaeological/historical evidence for it's existance before 800BCE, long after the Sumerians were extinct. If anything there is more evidence that the Kingdom of Judah was created by the Assyrians either as a buffer state with Egypt or to exploit the Olive oil resources of the region. 

In any event  there is no extra-Biblical evidence of any uniform religious or ethnic groupings in that area at that time.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



What about the Moabite stone, which says that the Moabites were defeated by King Omri of Israel?  Or the Egyptian records saying that their Pharaoh defeated King Josiah of Judah?  You also haven't addressed the Hasmonean Kingdom.  And are you saying that the New Testament is not reliable either?


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...





ForeverYoung436 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



I'm not holding my breath, but recent research by historians such as John Ma in Oxford, suggests that much, if not all of the Maccabee story, is fabricated propaganda.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > This conflict has always been and will always be about Muslim intolerance and violence toward others.
> ...



Israel is a tolerant, democratic, Western style nation.  Muslim societies....not so much.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



What are you jerking yourself off to now, Achmed?  Israel is treated and recognized as all other member states in the UN.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Irrelevant crap.  There are people who deny the existence of Jesus too.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore, et al,

I have never "ducked the question."



P F Tinmore said:


> I have previously asked you to confirm Israel's right to territorial integrity and you have always ducked the question.


*(COMMENT)*

The right of "Territorial Integrity" is a product --- that is derived from the "right of self-determination."  

You cannot actually have a "territory" to have "integrity" over until you "declare independence;" which you cannot have until you exercise the "right of self-determination."  They are all interrelated.  In the case of the Israeli's:


The exercised the "right of self-determination."
The exercise was by "declaring independence."
They declared independence over a "territory."
The now have the right of "territorial integrity."

It is just that simple.  There is none of this nonsense you espouse about transfer and title --- some authority or international this or that.  It is a very straight-forward process.  If the Israelis can maintain the integrity of their territory --- it is theirs.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Ha ha ha ha.  There are hundreds of thousands of archeological sites and artifacts that prove conclusively the existence of an Israel.  You Jew haters are truly pathetic.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



I am not referring to a Hanukkah menorah burning for 8 days, but the fact that Hyrcanus, Aristobulus and Alexandra ruled Judea.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Yes, the Moabite stone circa 840BCE, aka Meshe Stelle is one of the 8 in question, not sure which "Egyptian records" you refer to, care to elaborate or provide a link?


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



You totally reject the fact that the temple existed during the roman occupation?  That they destroyed the temple?  That judaism was the religion of the people in the land?
What of cyrus and the return of the jews and rebuilding of the temple.
There are a number of stele that mention Israel and david written by neighbors to Israel.  Merneptah stele is from 1200 bce.  Kurkh is 853 bce.  Moabite is from 840 bce.

The land has been rebuild, over built and added to many times since the first civilizations.  Keep digging down and there might be a wealth of archeological evidence.  People are still finding everything from the ottoman to roman occupation.  The deeper you go the older you find, much like the city of troy.
If they can find the cities around the dead sea from the time of abraham and lot, they might find more satisfying evidence for the rest of the history timeline as well.  One of the problems is much of the ancient evidence is probably under existing building and no one is able to dig under and search of older evidence.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 29, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I have never "ducked the question."
> 
> ...


Blah, blah, blah! Who says it is theirs? Can you document it?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 29, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


Who else was there at the time?


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Neither am I. I don't dispute there was a Theocratic dynasty that ruled over large parts of the area that tried to impose Judaism by force; however how sucessful they were is moot.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Leave him alone the guy is an ignorant moron.  The history of Israel is even confirmed and cross referenced through the Roman, Persian, Greek, etc. historical records and artifacts:

Esther - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Images of the Arch of Titus and reliefs after 81 CE Rome. Digital Imaging Project Art historical images of European and North American architecture and sculpture from classical Greek to Post-modern. Scanned from slides taken on site by Mary Ann Sullivan Bluffton College.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



You really ought to read posts carefully before mouthing off.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



The insane, ignorant garbage that comes out of these Jew haters is truly remarkable.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



You are trying to deny the existence of an ancient Israel.   Maybe you should be the first Muslim writer for The Onion?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Well there weren't any Arabs, Muslims,or Palestinians.  LOL


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


What were Native Americans called before it was America?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



The OP was about Gaza illegally training new terrorist fighters.  Let's get back to that.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Natives of the land are the Jews.  It has been their holy land and there is archeological evidence of if going back over 3000 years. Everyone else that came after were invaders, especially the more recent Arab Muslims. Even as late as the 1400 years ago, the founder of the terrorist religion of Islam didn't acknowledge the existence of a Palestine and a Palestinian people.  But he did confirm the existence of Israel and that it belongs to the Jews. Open your Koran and show me where Mohammad talks about this mythical Palestine.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



They like to divert when things aren't going their way. LOL


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Natives of the land are the Jews.​
Oh really, I heard they immigrated from Egypt.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



What else did you hear? Ha ha ha.  Yes, although there is no actual archeological record, the Jews supposedly migrated from Egypt and established their kingdom in a land that they believe was promised to them. Even your prophet Mohammad confirmed this.  Ya gotta ask yourself, why didn't Mohammad mention this mythical Palestine and Palestinian people1400 years ago?


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



I dare you talk like this in a Muslim society.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore,

That is exactly what the "right of self-determination" is all about.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore, et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

There is no requirement of "documentation."  While there are such things, as in the Peace of Westphalia, after 1806 (the Fall of the Holy Roman Empire and the Political Influence of the Pope), such things are really rewritten in Treaties, if at all.  Certainly, the Arab Palestinian has no deed, title, treaty or other political devise that extends to them any sovereignty over any territory; not in the last 1000 years.

Who says it is theirs?  They (the Israelis) say it is theirs, just as the French say France is their; just as the Britons say the UK is theirs; just as the Saudi's say Saudi Arabia is theirs; and each defending their right to sovereignty.  The Arab Palestinians can say and claim anything they want, but they have to defend their claim; which they haven't in over a 1000 years.

Just as you claim that the "right to self-determination" is a "RIGHT" --- it is a "right for all peoples," not just the whiny Arab Palestinians.

The Jewish State of Israel defends it rights --- that is all that is required.

The question needs to be reversed:  Who says the Arab-Palestinians have any territorial rights?  Who says it theirs?  _(And don't claim that the Treaty of Lausanne bequeaths anything  to the Arab-Palestinian --- it certainly does not.  The citizenship issue has nothing to do with territorial integrity.  All that territory was remanded to the Allied Powers.)_

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 29, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> What are you talking about?  I live in SoCal.



What Mosque do you attend?

You're not planning anything in the area, are you?


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Let's see, "no", "no", "yes, there is no extra-Biblical evidence that Judaism was the majority or even the only religion practised in the area, in fact there is plenty of Biblical evidence to suggest it wasn't".

Cyrus the Great did a lot of restoring local deities, at least he bragged about it on the Cylinder inscription, so It's quite possible he allowed the elites who wanted to return to the region to rebuild their temple. However there are no extra-biblical contemporary sources that say so. I've already said there are 8 inscriptions that could be interpreted as referencing "Israel" but there is no clear consensus on the matter. As for the Tel Dan inscription, scholars have come round to the idea that "BYTDWD" is not an Assyrian dynastic label, i.e. "House of David" but merely the place name of a minor town which could equally loosely translate as "Praiseville".

I agree there is the possibility that new evidence may well appear, but given this area has been dug up more than any other area of archaeological interest since the Zionist "Ahnenerbe" started in 1948, I think that's now a long shot.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Like I said, faith is for the feeble minded.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Yet the Bible says the "Jews" were invaders who stole the land from the natives because their god told them to...


----------



## Challenger (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Okay. I'll repeat "si vis pacem, para bellum" and who says they are being trained illegally? What does that even mean?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Can you translate?  I don't read Latin.  But I do know Hebrew.  
Mishaneh makom mishaneh mazal.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Can you translate?  I don't read Latin.  But I do know Hebrew.
> Mishaneh makom mishaneh mazal.



If you want peace, prepare for war


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 29, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,
> 
> That is exactly what the "right of self-determination" is all about.
> 
> ...


There is much about Israel that is just "say so" with nothing to prove it to be true.

You have offered nothing but say so. I see no proof of anything.

the French say France is their; just as the Britons say the UK is theirs; just as the Saudi's say Saudi Arabia is theirs.​
And Israel says that Palestine is theirs.

Uhhh.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 29, 2015)

Uncensored2008 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Can you translate?  I don't read Latin.  But I do know Hebrew.
> ...



That's like saying, "If you wannna be a virgin, then prepare to screw around."


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

No, Israel says that "Israel" is their sovereign territory.



P F Tinmore said:


> [
> There is much about Israel that is just "say so" with nothing to prove it to be true.
> 
> You have offered nothing but say so. I see no proof of anything.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, unless you want to argue that the "right of self-determination" does not apply to the Jewish People.

Israel says Israel is theirs (not Palestine).  Don't alter the quote just to change the argument.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3 (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ...I dare you to watch this:


Same old "..._how can a just, merciful, loving God create_..." tripe that atheists have been pushing for centuries... Lost Souls are attracted to such as moths to a flame.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ...Established in 1948, true. Being a member of the UN however, does not automatically infer recognition as a state.


One need look no further than the number of countries which have full diplomatic relations with Israel in order to gauge its recognition as a state.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 29, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> No, Israel says that "Israel" is their sovereign territory.
> 
> ...


More say so. No proof.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Nice diversion. The inconvenient truth you are avoiding is that you can be an outspoken atheist in Israel, but in Muslim societies including your beloved Palestinians that is a death sentence.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ...I dare you to watch this:
> ...



Strangely enough, you will find that atheists in general are allied with Islamists.

The Iranian revolution of 1979 was originally done by Marxists who aligned themselves with Khomeini. When the Shah was deposed Khomieni turned on them and started executing the same people who brought him to power.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


It's not strange at all.

Atheists seem to utilize two primary rationalizations to justify their stance...

1. There is no data regarding the existence of a godhead

2. Any god worth his/her/its salt would not create a universe with <fill-in-the-blank(s)>

They've been pitching that for hundreds of years.

And every time they serve-up those shopworn old negatives, they delude themselves into thinking that they're bringing something new to the table.

Ho-hum.


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 29, 2015)

Hamas want to go to war with the PA and refuse to relinquish control of gaza to a unity or PA rule.
Hamas wants to go to war with Israel.
Iran and the UN have both cut the purse string to hamas and gaza.
Hamas has to come to the reality violence is not the answer and they do not have the right to wage war on Israel, the PA, Egypt or anyone else.
They do not speak or act for all gazans, palestinians, arabs, muslims, etc.


----------



## browsing deer (Jul 29, 2015)

25,000 guys why want to fight Israel as an army will soon be 25,000 more widows.  They have no clue


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 29, 2015)

browsing deer said:


> 25,000 guys why want to fight Israel as an army will soon be 25,000 more widows.  They have no clue




 and 25,000 more that hamas does not have the money to pay for.
Peace will bring more jobs and prosperity, but peace is a price they are unwilling to pay.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 29, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


So the "atheist" is going by what the Bible says then.  Ha ha ha.  You Jew hating ex Muslims play it so convenient.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 29, 2015)

Uncensored2008 said:


> What Mosque do you attend?
> 
> You're not planning anything in the area, are you?


I'm a white, Irish Catholic and I'm planning on watching the Dodgers or Angels win the World Series.

Next question?


----------



## toastman (Jul 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...



How many times must you be told that Tinmore pre requisites do not apply to real life?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Israel is a tolerant, democratic, Western style nation.  Muslim societies....not so much.


What about the Dutch?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 29, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> I was speaking about Israel proper, within the 1967 lines, which everyone agrees is Israel.  Extremists don't even accept that, like monte and Tinmore.  At least you and pbel and Humanity concede that point.


I just said something nice to you and the way I see it,
you owe me $4.75 (+tax).


----------



## Challenger (Jul 30, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



For now, perhaps, but a Zionist Israeli theocracy is only just around the corner:

"...70 percent of respondents believe the Jews are the "Chosen People," 65 percent believe the Torah and mitzvot (religious commandments ) are God-given, and 56 percent believe in life after death."

"...only 44 percent said that if Jewish law and democratic values clashed, the latter should always be preferred..."

"Fully 61 percent of respondents said the state should "ensure that public life is conducted according to Jewish religious tradition,"

"The study also found that 70 percent of respondents believe the Jews are the "Chosen People," 65 percent believe the Torah and mitzvot (religious commandments ) are God-given..."

 Advertisement

This is in sharp contrast to Jewish people outside Zionist Israel,

"Of the religions surveyed in the poll, Jews were found to be the least religious: Only 38 percent of the Jewish population worldwide considers itself religious, while 54 sees itself as non-religious and 2 percent categorizes itself as atheist. In comparison, 97 percent of Buddhists, 83 percent of Protestant Christians and 74 percent of Muslims consider themselves religious."

 Advertisement

Seems more and more people are coming around to my world view than yours.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 30, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Ho hum indeed. You cling to your delusions, I'll cling to mine.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jul 30, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ...Ho hum indeed. You cling to your delusions, I'll cling to mine.


Oh, I have very few delusions, and, insofar as a godhead is concerned, I'd style myself as a Christian-leaning Agnostic... a bona fide Doubting Thomas...

With an Irish-German Roman Catholic ethnic and religious background... not particularly 'married' to any specific dogma, other than a vaguely and generically Christian ethical or moral base, adapted and evolved and secularized to some considerable extent, a _Cafeteria Christian_ format, streamlined for convenience and the practicalities of life.

Neither am I an _End-of-Days_ fruitcake who thinks that the Jewish Reconquista will trigger the Rapture, or any of that weird shit...

Just someone who stands with Israel in the recapture and consolidation of their old spiritual and ancestral homeland..

Encouraging the fools in Gaza and the West Bank to wake up and face Reality and to pack up and leave after pointlessly and needlessly playing Losers and Victims for 67 years...

Far better to pack-up and leave rather than assemble yet another laughable so-called Army of Fools, LED by fools, doomed to die, pre-ordained to failure, pissing into the wind, as those particular fools so often do...

Soon, in Webster's, we'll see: "dumbasses - 1. see _Palestinians_"

But, even as I laugh at those incredibly foolish Neanderthals, who continue to hit themselves in the head with a hammer, again and again and again and again, and even though I despise the dogma and real-world effects of their particular flavor of Religion, I do not laugh at them for sensing the Living God within themselves and in their surroundings...

One difference between us is that I do not label as 'fools' and 'morons', any _Person of Faith_, who does genuinely believe in the existence of a God, as Christians or Jews or Muslims would recognize the concept.

Good, honest, intelligent people of all walks of life and levels of education and ethnic and racial and political stripes, feel or sense the presence of the Living God within them and around them, and incorporate those intuitive feelings into their everyday lives.

Who am I - or you, for that matter - to challenge that inner spirituality or the direction it takes?

It is true, that some visions of The Godhead are better than others, in the context of Peace vs War - or helping others vs. self-sustenance - or doing Good vs. Evil...

And some of the worst impacts of those visions are certainly open to robust scrutiny or criticism...

But, as to the Inner Spirituality or Spiritual Direction which these folks sense and develop within themselves, this is the way that Mankind rolls...

And any respectable live-and-let-live mindset will demonstrate tolerance for such spirituality, rather than labeling it as idiotic or moronic or foolish or stupid.

You fell entirely comfortable insulting your fellow man who - like most folks on the face of the planet - feel and act upon that Inner Spirituality, in their own ways.

I do not.

But I greatly enjoy calling-out smug, foolhardy, unimaginative, arrogant atheist bastards who think themselves _sssooo_ phukking superior to those who believe in a God.

Because they're not.


----------



## Challenger (Jul 30, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > ...Ho hum indeed. You cling to your delusions, I'll cling to mine.
> ...



Here you and I agree up to a point, I don't care what individuals believe, personal spiritual belief is just that, personal. That, however, shouldn't and doesn't stop me thinking and stating that faith is for the feeble minded. Feeble-minded does not necessarily just mean stupid or moronic, but includes those people easily led by those following their own agendas and that includes priests, rabbis, imams, politicians, con-artists and flimflam artists of every type. You can be good, honest, and intelligent from any walk of life and level of education, ethnic and political stripe; but you can still be conned, lied to and manipulated. Organised religions have had centuries of experience in and are masters of manipulation, so pardon me if I don't take things on "faith"; it doesn't stop me enjoying the beauty of a sunset, or the sight and sound of newborn life.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jul 30, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ...Here you and I agree up to a point...


Surprisingly, yes.



> ...I don't care what individuals believe, personal spiritual belief is just that, personal. That, however, shouldn't and doesn't stop me thinking and stating that faith is for the feeble minded...


Noted.



> ...Feeble-minded does not necessarily just mean stupid or moronic, but includes those people easily led by those following their own agendas and that includes priests, rabbis, imams, politicians, con-artists and flimflam artists of every type. You can be good, honest, and intelligent from any walk of life and level of education, ethnic and political stripe; but you can still be conned, lied to and manipulated...


You would have been better off using 'naivety' or 'gullibility' or 'lemming-like behaviors' as your descriptor, rather than 'feeble-minded', but I take your meaning.



> ...Organised religions have had centuries of experience in and are masters of manipulation...


Yep. Nolo contendere. But they have also been Transmitters of Knowledge and Moral Standards over the generations, and there was (and is) great value in that.

A double-edged sword, to be sure, but not an insurmountable barrier to Belief, for those capable of distinguishing between the Spiritual and the Temporal.

Then again, it is true that a very great many folks - especially noticeable, the lower on the education-rungs one travels - lack that ability to make such a distinction.



> ...so pardon me if I don't take things on "faith"...


Nobody insists that you do... well, not outside a Muslim-dominated society, anyway.



> ...it doesn't stop me enjoying the beauty of a sunset, or the sight and sound of newborn life.


Yep.

I understand the reference, in a Believer vs. Non-Believer context.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 30, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Even in a "Zionist theocracy" Jews will not go around executing atheists and gays, you shithead. What a dumbass!


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 30, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Even in a "Zionist theocracy" Jews will not go around executing atheists and gays, you shithead. What a dumbass!


God-dammit, say something nice!


----------



## Challenger (Jul 31, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Even in a "Zionist theocracy" Jews will not go around executing atheists and gays, you shithead. What a dumbass!
> ...



He can't, he defines himself through his feeble-minded hatreds.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jul 31, 2015)

Challenger said:


> He can't, he defines himself through his feeble-minded hatreds.


Why do daughters of battered wives marry abusive husbands? Because that's all they know!  I always wondered why people chose _familiar over harmful?

_


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...







 Yet the islamonazi's are still hell bent on wiping out the Jews and Christians in the M.E. What do you think the world will do when they achive this aim ?


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Bleipriester said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,
> ...








 The Palestinians have had it within their power since 1947 to have their own nation and have refused it constantly. In 1948 they decided to go to bed with Jordan and Egypt and destroy the Jews, they failed massively. Then they stayed with Jordan and Egypt until 1967 when Israel defended against attack by Egypt and Jordan and occupied the land. Between 1948 and 1967 there was no mention of a "Palestinian" state at all. Then in 1988 the Palestinians declared independence and took no further action towards self development and self determination, wanting someone else to force Israel into giving them want they want. And that is the Palestinian way to force their demands through a third party while bombing and murdering innocents until something is done. The UN is powerless to do anything and all Israel need do is take the case to the ICC/ICJ and ask them to judge the UN illegal actions in line with current International law. This would lead to the UN folding and the Palestinians subsequently dying through lack of aid.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Humanity said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza
> ...









 Even though the Israeli's and the Palestinian's agreed to the land being under Israeli sovereignty the UN shows its any Israel side once again. And who will impose the illegal, under International law, solution without causing a massive war in the M.E, and possible nuclear weapons use ?


----------



## Roudy (Aug 1, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Yes, as an atheist you focus your hatred towards Jews even though in Muslim societies such as the Palestinians, atheists are hung and executed.  Talk about feeble minded.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Humanity said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
> ...








 For the same reason the USA and Korea do, because they can.

Once again you use the term Zionist out of context and as a racial insult, not once but twice. And don't bleat that tiy haven't because the evidence is their for all to see.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...







 Pay the welfare money to the unemployed defence workers laid off because Israel is now free to buy weapons on the open market. And any left over could be spent on buying cheap Pakistani medical supplies to supplant those no longer coming from Israel


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> If Israel had to fight hand to hand , man to man with like weapons they'd be extinct. The IDF don't seem to be able to run, they just shoot. They let their bullets do the chasing.





Do you mean like they did in 1948/1949 when 10% of the Jews were killed in the war started by arab muslims, then again in 1967 when the arab muslims planned to exterminate the Jews and destroy Israel. Then the Palestinians decided to fight from behind women and children because they are cowards, so Israel just fired from cover as well


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...







Says who. As the UN has stated that Israel is the Jewish state in their revised charter, you should read it sometime


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...







 How about you give an example of the Palestinians protecting themselves that was not a result of Israel protecting themselves from Palestinian violence and terrorism ?


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Typically pointless, shortstop. Gaza does not have an army, it has a collection of Islamic terrorist syndicates, often hostile to one another.
> ...







 They are according to other arab muslims, the US, UK and most of Europe


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 1, 2015)

toastman said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...






 Exactly what I was thinking, one of the boards biggest racists calling others racists.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 1, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> They are according to other arab muslims, the US, UK and most of Europe


1.5 million people are not terrorists.


----------



## Roudy (Aug 1, 2015)

Afghanis living under the control of the Taliban weren't all terrorists either.


----------



## Humanity (Aug 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



How have I used "zionist" out of context?


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 2, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Afghanis living under the control of the Taliban weren't all terrorists either.


People defending their home from foreign invaders, are not terrorists.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 2, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Humanist; there's a difference. Point out to me please, where any of my posts have demonstrated hatred towards Jewish people as opposed to Zionists and Zionism (which I freely admit, I detest because of what they do rather than who they are);  for that matter please provide a link to Palestinians executing atheists for their beliefs (or lack thereof).


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 2, 2015)

Humanity,  aris2chat, et al,

*(A BIT OFF-TOPIC)*

A treaty, even the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is a "voluntary" agreement _(a formally concluded and ratified agreement between countries)_.  It is not compulsory and it is not concluded as a matter of coercion.  Just as the NPT say, in its text, each state enters into the agreement "exercising its national sovereignty has the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have *jeopardized the supreme interests of its country*."  It is not mandatory for a country, which is proven to be surrounded by other nations which have demonstrated _(on more than one occasion)_ to be directly hostile to it, to sign into the agreement when the agreement would jeopardize the defense of the nation.

An no nation should be concerned with the status of Israel, relative to the accession and ratification of the treaty, if it follows the protocols pursuant to the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States.  And no nation should be involved in any such action that would  impair the inherent right of Israeli sovereignty which would require self defense measures against an armed attack.



Humanity said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The NPT is an agreement on several issues, the three greatest agreements would be the prohibition in the transfer of:

Research and development of a weapon --- and ---
The unauthorized dissemination of critical weapons design information --- and ---
Special Materials:

(a) source or special fissionable material, or
(b) equipment or material especially designed or prepared for the processing, use or production of special fissionable material, to any non-nuclear-weapon State for peaceful purposes.​
There are two different types of parties to the NPT Agreement:


An Article I:  Nuclear-weapon State Party (NSP).
An Article II:  Non-nuclear-weapon State Party (NNSP).​
Based on your insinuation _(the assumption that Israel has a nuclear weapons capacity)_ --- what advantage do you expect if Israel should become a signatory to the agreement _(under the assumption it would be a NSP)_?  The agreement would not require Israel to relinquish any of its capacity _(if it actually has a nuclear weapons capacity)_ in any respect.  There are 11 Articles to the Treaty.  In fact, I wonder just what prohibition aspect of the NPT you think the Israel has violated; even if it were a party (signatory).

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > They are according to other arab muslims, the US, UK and most of Europe
> ...







 Your say so is not worth the paper it is written on. But the UK, EU, US and Saudi words on this matter carry much weight. And they say that hamas and its supporters are terrorists


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 2, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...







 perfect example above when you claim  " Zionist Israel "  when not all of Israel is Zionist, yet you imply that the arab muslims, Christians and Atheists are all Zionists. It is no different to me claiming that every muslim is a hamas terrorist.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Afghanis living under the control of the Taliban weren't all terrorists either.
> ...







 So that's the Israeli's of the hook then as they are defending their homes from islamonazi terrorist attacks. And as the evidence shown proves the arab muslims have no legal right to claim the land granted under international law to the Jews in 1923.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 2, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...







 Define what you mean by Zionism and Zionist first. How it differs from the standard definition of Zionist and Zionism


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 2, 2015)

Billo_Really,  Phoenall,  et al,

The People of Gaza may not all be terrorists; but a vast majority of the People of Gaza constitute a citizenry that supports terrorism, and promote government behind which terrorism has become a statecraft.



Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > They are according to other arab muslims, the US, UK and most of Europe
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The governance of the Gaza Strip is carried out by the HAMAS Administration (Hamas government in Gaza), led by Ismail Haniyeh, senior political leader of Hamas, from 2007 until 2014; when it agreed to formerly join the Palestinian Unity Government.  While the words were said, there never seemed the actual intent to conform with the ideals of the joint HAMAS and Fatah Administration; no real cooperation with the two power brokers.  Neither of which seem to be interested in a peaceful settlement in their dispute behind the conflict with Israel.


*Hamas Rejects Fateh's Demand for Gaza Rule*
Fateh leader Azzam al-Ahmad had said on Sunday that Hamas "foiled" efforts towards a unity government, and that the group must hand over rule of the Gaza Strip as a condition for forming the new government.Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said that …
International Middle East Media Center · 7/30/2015

*Hamas threatens to exit national unity government with ...*
www.jpost.com/.../Hamas-threatens-to...unity-government-with-PA-387543
Jul 31, 2015 ·

*Abbas: Islamic State already operating in Gaza*
In December, Hamas denied the presence of the Islamic State in the Gaza Strip, after fliers signed by the jihadist ... July 1 attack on Egyptian security services. The coordinator of government activities in the territories …
The Times of Israel · 7/31/2015​
The People of Gaza and the government, which they have adopted and supported groups like the al-Qassam Brigades and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, generally suggests that the reports of high rates of unemployment, violence, and drug use are over exaggerated.  The Palestinians seem perfectly content with the scope and nature of the success to which the HAMAS regime has spread upon Gazan life. 

In addition to the Palestinian proper groups, like the al-Qassam Brigades and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Gazan's seem to be supporting the Iranians and elements of DAESH (ISIS).  This material support the Palestinians render appear to be intended: 


(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; 
(ii) to influence the policy of a government (like the US and Israel) by intimidation or coercion; or 
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government (like the US and Israel) by such activities as jihadist attacks, hijackings, piracy, suicided bombings, rocket and mortar launches, or kidnapping and murder;​
The radicalism of the  Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) wants be dropped from the Foreign Terrorist Organizations List (the US and the EU) --- not because it has adopted peaceful means --- but because it argues that it has the right to use any an all means available to it, and that the world is now willing to accept and tolerate its radical ideology and now being the motivation behind much of the Islamic Movements today.  HAMAS and the Palestinians People believe that they have the right to eject the Jewish State of Israel from the territory once under the Mandate of Palestine; that is their duty to do so --- and that the are entitled to do so under international law.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 2, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Billo_Really,  Phoenall,  et al,
> 
> The People of Gaza may not all be terrorists; but a vast majority of the People of Gaza constitute a citizenry that supports terrorism, and promote government behind which terrorism has become a statecraft.
> 
> ...


*Hamas Rejects Fateh's Demand for Gaza Rule​*​
Fateh leader Azzam al-Ahmad had said on Sunday that Hamas "foiled" efforts towards a unity government, and that the group must hand over rule of the Gaza Strip as a condition for forming the new government.Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said that …
International Middle East Media Center · 7/30/2015*​
And it almost tells you why in the article.


----------



## Humanity (Aug 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Wow, you really need to get some comprehension lessons...

I stated "zionist Israel" correct... Because not of all Israel is zionist.... It makes a distinction between "zionist Israel" and the rest of the population of Israel!

And you are right, it's no different to you claiming that every Muslim is a hamas terrorist, which do do quite frequently! Except that I didn't say that every Jew is a zionist did I? 

Israel is governed by a zionist party, that makes Israel, zionist Israel...

Whilst you confuse 'people' with 'politics' you will never quite get a handle on what is happening!


----------



## Challenger (Aug 3, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



He knows full well what he's doing, he's just a Hasbara troll-not worth the bother.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 3, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...







 Then seeing as Palestine is ruled by a terrorist organisation they must all be terrorists as well.

 While you confuse people full stop you will never get any intelligence.

 You constantly use the term Zionist instead of Jew because you believe that others wont see your racism. A pity that now we can see through your NAZI tricks and will out you and your NAZI friends everytime.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 3, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...







 While you are an islamomarxist propagandist troll that does not know the first thing about the Isreal/Palestine conflict and just blame the Jews for everything like the good little NAZI you are.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I posted this excerpt in the interest of honesty --- in the discussion.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > *Hamas Rejects Fateh's Demand for Gaza Rule*
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I see you are trying to imply something, but I am hesitant to assume what that might be.

I do not believe that the People of the 1988 Declared State of Palestine have a valid government that actually represents both the West Bank and Gaza Strip simultaneously.  I believe the People of the 1988 State of Palestine as in political chaos, wanting something --- but not knowing what that something is.  With HAMAS controlling the Gaza Strip and FATAH controlling the West Bank, it is --- as if --- there are two different kinds of Palestinians --- separate and distinct from one another.

It is fairly clear that HAMAS (the Islamic Resistance Movement) which advocates Jihad and the use of "any means necessary to eject the Jewish State of Israel" from territory declared independent under the right of self-determination, is diametrically opposed to pledge under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter (1945) and reaffirmed _(word-for-word)_ under the Declaration on Principles (DOP) of *International Law* concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the *Charter of the United Nations* _(A/RES/25/2625 1970)_, has questionable political and is acting inconsistent with International Humanitarian Law (IHL); and further stipulated in the Status of Palestine [_according Palestine non-member observer State status_ (A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012)] by which it affirmed, inter alia, the duty of every State to promote, through joint and separate action, realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples (including the Jewish State of Israel).

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 3, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I posted this excerpt in the interest of honesty --- in the discussion.
> 
> ...


You need to read some things to understand my position.

Whose Coup Exactly The Electronic Intifada

*Subcontracting Repression in the West Bank and Gaza*
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/27/o...epression-in-the-west-bank-and-gaza.html?_r=0

Oslo s Roots Kissinger the PLO and the Peace Process


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






Two of your links are out and out islamonazi propaganda so can be ignored as being biased

 The third is from last year and is written by islamonazi propagandists.

 Cant you do any better than this crap.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


When you have nothing.

*Call names!*


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Here is some information from a real propaganda site.

There are several lies in here.

United States Security Coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority USSC


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, I've read this before.  Misdirection intermingled with some truth.

I would recognize some of the more valid points made by Dr Osamah Khalil; with serious reservations.  And I would also give Ms Sabrien Amrov _(TRT Researcher)_ some greater recognition _(although I think she was used more as a writer and fact checker --- not exploiting for her __intellect__ to the degree that they should have)_.  But anyone who finds Alaa Tartir _[Palestine Police Network (formerly w/Palestine-American Research Center)]_ credibility beyond that of an independent blogger, needs to understand that he is NOT an unbiased source or story teller.  He is as "Pro-Palestinian" as they come:

Both sited articles come from, ultimately, the same source:  _al-Shabaka_


*AL-SHABAKA—THE PALESTINIAN POLICY NETWORK*

Claims that the “opinions expressed in Al-Shabaka publications do not necessarily represent the views of the organization, the policy advisors or members, or its donors. Nor is Al-Shabaka responsible for any positions or actions by policy advisors or members in the network.” However, Al-Shabaka clearly promotes the Palestinian narrative of “the right of return,” the “Nakba,” the boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS) campaign, and regularly features writers who accuse Israel of “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing” without featuring alternative views.   _*SOURCE:*_ NGO Monitor  May 25, 2014 ​

Dr Khalil is an al-Shabaka Policy Advisor and Alaa Tartir is a network member (Program Director) of al-Shabaka.

*BTW NOTE: *​​"It should be noted that according to NGO Monitor research, al-Shabaka received $30,000 in 2013 from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF)."   Daniel Levy, a UK Business entrepreneur, a trustee of the RBF, was the target of dozens of antisemitic messages have been posted on Twitter aimed at Tottenham Hotspur.   Chairman Levy is a co-founder of J Street and a member of the board of directors of Molad-The Center for the Renewal of Democracy; as well as a member of the board of directors of the New Israel Fund (NIF), which is affiliated with many of the Israeli NGO recipients. ​

It is a testament to the Jewish Community that they would contribute to a Pro-Palestinian program such that they could publish their views.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

If one looks at the timeframe, in which the Secretary Kissinger established a footprint, you will notice that the claim made by Dr Khalil practically opens with:  "However, Al-Shabaka Policy Advisor Osamah Khalil draws on declassified U.S. diplomatic documents to argue that the roots of Oslo can be traced to the aftermath of the 1973 October War."  This may in part be true.  Certainly there was some influence there.  But seldom, in such complex political environments, is one aspect the sole catalyst for the formulation of a complete policy.  There were other things that were happening in the early 1970s, to include the 1970 bombing of the Swissair Flight 330 by the Palestinians, the Avivim school bus attacks by Palestinian, and the 1972 Massacre at the Munich Olympics by the Palestinians.

This was an especially interesting observation, made by DR Khalil, of the processes at that time.  (Read it carefully!) 


In spite of Arafat’s attempts to appear moderate, Kissinger was unmoved. He continued working toward a second disengagement agreement between Israel and Egypt, while ignoring Syria and the PLO. The Sinai II agreement was signed in September and was accompanied by a secret memorandum of understanding(MOU) between the U.S. and Israel, in which Washington agreed not to “recognize or negotiate with” the PLO as long as it did not recognize Israel’s right to exist or accept UNSCR 242 and 338.​
Now, who wanted recognition of what --- as is compared to today?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Humanity (Aug 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



I obviously over estimated your intellect as you post is both contradictory and, quite frankly, grasping at straws.....

Let me try and help you...

_"Then seeing as Palestine is ruled by a terrorist organisation they must all be terrorists as well."_

Is like saying every American must be a Democrat because it is ruled my Democrats!

_"While you confuse people full stop you will never get any intelligence."_

See above point... You really have a problem differentiating 'people' and 'politics'... You use such broad sweeping generalisations that show your true colours as a bigoted, racist... Just because a country is "ruled" by a particular political party does not mean that everyone in that country is an "xxxx" (Replace "xxxx" with whatever word you choose)

_"You constantly use the term Zionist instead of Jew because you believe that others wont see your racism. A pity that now we can see through your NAZI tricks and will out you and your NAZI friends everytime."_

Well spotted! Yes I do use the term zionist rather than the word Jew...

I am not anti Jew, I am not anti Israel... I m however, anti zionist... I do not accept the extremist views of zionism, in the same way that I do not accept the extremist views of Hamas!

You see, zionism is a political movement... Jew is a family of people who hold a very strong religious belief.... Neither neither can be directly linked, neither of which can I be racist toward!

I am not a nazi... Never have been, never will be...

Your decision to continue this 'debate' with the use of cheap shots and contradiction is a clear sign of someone losing the 'debate'... It's quite comical that you choose to use my words rather than your own, and then start the name calling because, quite simply, you really are out of your depth...

It's fine Phoney, you carry on son... It saves the rest of us pointing out that, at the end of the day, you really have NO clue what you are saying!


----------



## Roudy (Aug 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



When confronted with the truth you always whine and bitch.  

Tissue?


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 3, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Billo_Really,  Phoenall,  et al,
> 
> The People of Gaza may not all be terrorists; but a vast majority of the People of Gaza constitute a citizenry that supports terrorism, and promote government behind which terrorism has become a statecraft.
> 
> ...


I consider the Likud Party a terrorist organization and the attacks on Gaza, state-sanctioned terrorism by Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 3, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, I've read this before.  Misdirection intermingled with some truth.
> 
> ...


Do you use the term "Pro-Palestinian" to imply that what they say is not true?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 3, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, I've read this before.  Misdirection intermingled with some truth.
> 
> ...


But anyone who finds Alaa Tartir _[Palestine Police Network (formerly w/Palestine-American Research Center)]_ credibility beyond that of an independent blogger,...​
Alaa Tartir is the Program Director of Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network. Tartir is also a Post-Doctoral Researcher at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Switzerland, and a Visiting Scholar at Utrecht University’s Department of History and Art History, The Netherlands. Tartir previously served as Researcher in International Development Studies at the London School of Economics (LSE), where he earned his PhD. He also served as a Senior Research Associate and Fellow at Palestine Economic Policy Research Institute (MAS), the Bisan Center for Research and Development, and the Palestinian American Research Center (PARC). Tartir has received several awards, including the Swiss Government’s Academic Excellence Scholarship and the LSE’s award for Global Politics.

Policy Advisors

Blogger, indeed.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 3, 2015)

Billo_Really,  et al,

Damn near every insurgency claims to be freedom fighters of one sort or another.  Islamist and Jihadist most of all.



Billo_Really said:


> I consider the Likud Party a terrorist organization and the attacks on Gaza, state-sanctioned terrorism by Israel.


*(COMMENT)*

Even today, the Saudi Arabians are being intimidated by the likes of HAMAS and the various Palestinian Islamists.  The Saudi's are deathly afraid.  HM The King seems to believe that Saudi Arabia is in capable of addressing the threat from HAMAS and its Iranian Allies, and at the same time, HAMAS and the al-Qassam Brigades supported by the Islamic Jihad.  So it is going to reach-out and offer an olive branch of support for the Jihadists and associated Islamic/Palestinian terrorist groups (Hizbollah included) in order to buy time and protect itself; attempting to play both sides against the middle.  The Saudi Arabians don't want to fight either side; and they don't need America.  At the same time, HAMAS has gone begging for dollars; and the Saudis have a ready supply.

If HAMAS can swing Saudi Arabia, they think the same type of threat might be effective against the European Union which is also unable to defend itself against the Palestinians with an in-place infrastructure within most of the European Nations.  This is the quintessential terrorist act which seeks to intimidate or coerce what few qusi-Allies the US has in the Middle East/Persian Gulf Region and the EU; bringing fear and pressure to bear --- to influence the policy of these varios scared governments that are unable to stand against the threat.   In this way, the objective is to isolate the US as an influence in the region.

The second prong of the assault on the Israelis, is to bring what influence it can on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to influence its decision to make it appear that Israel has no right to exist and no right to self-defense against Jihadist and terrorist activity directed at the ejection of the Jewish State of Israel.  This again will impact America in the establishment of the accusation that America is supporting a rogue state that was outlined and recommended by the UN in the 1947 Resolution 181(II); as referenced in the 2012 Status of Palestine recognition as an observer state.  In doing so, HAMAS will attempt to legitimize its affront to the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States and the UN Charter [Article 2(4)].

{T}he Arab Higher Committee Delegation wishes to stress the following (6 February 1948):

(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.​Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) (1988):

There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.
Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.
It is necessary to instill the spirit of Jihad in the heart of the nation so that they would confront the enemies and join the ranks of the fighters.​Hamas: Armed resistance not negotiable in struggle against Israel

Al-Zahhar stressed that the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) refuses a Palestinian state within the 1967 or 1948 territories, saying "Our policy is Palestine, all of Palestine". He explained that Palestine as a whole is a part of the Islamic dogma that is derived from the Holy Qura'an.​Senior Hamas Official: The Resistance Is Entitled To Attack Israel’s Embassies, Interests, And Officials Worldwide — And The Interests Of Its Allies, Headed By The U.S.

In an article published July 16, 2013 on Felesteen.ps, a website affiliated with Hamas, Hamas Refugee Affairs Department head Dr 'Issam 'Adwan argued that Hamas had the right to attack Israeli embassies and interests as well as senior Israeli officials anywhere in the world. He added that the resistance is also entitled to harm the interests of Israel's allies, headed by the U.S.​
The Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) is more of a threat to US Relations and commerce in the Middle East and Persian Gulf today, then at anytime in recent history.  And the fact that these Jihadists and terrorist seem to think that they can coerce and intimidate the US and its Allies needs to be the focus of US Policy in the coming year.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I don't believe I said that at all.  



P F Tinmore said:


> Do you use the term "Pro-Palestinian" to imply that what they say is not true?


*(COMMENT)*

I think I said:  "he is NOT an unbiased source or story teller."  Just as you are "not unbiased."  It tends to suggest that the outcome of the dissertation was predetermined before it was even written.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, he earned his doctorate in "Economics."



P F Tinmore said:


> Policy Advisors
> 
> Blogger, indeed.


*(COMMENT)*

This is a false appeal to authority.  He has no more understanding of foreign policy, public diplomacy or than Albert Einstein.  Tartir and Einstein each have their individual credentials and areas of expertise.  Neither is any more knowledgable than you or I. 

You will also note that I cited the disclaimer that as a Policy Advisor, they take no responsibility for his article.

Maybe I should have been more generous and said "contributing author."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 3, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I don't believe I said that at all.
> 
> ...


Do you use the term "not unbiased" to imply that what they say is not true?


----------



## Challenger (Aug 4, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, he earned his doctorate in "Economics."
> 
> ...



Václav Havel was a playwright who became President of Czechoslovakia,  
Ronald Regan was a actor who became U.S. President.

Does a doctorate in Economics prevent a person understanding foreign policy any more than acting in films of writing plays? How many politicians, worldwide have formal qualifications in "foreign policy"?


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Where is the name calling, all I did is point out that your sources are islamonazi propaganda shown by the people/media used.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 4, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Billo_Really,  et al,
> 
> Damn near every insurgency claims to be freedom fighters of one sort or another.  Islamist and Jihadist most of all.
> 
> ...



Disappointed. You normally leave posting drivel like this to others.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 Why are you deflecting and going of topic ?


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...







 Look at your own post dumbo as I just changed your words, so making you the one that thinks they are smart.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really,  Phoenall,  et al,
> ...








 And your views are worth about as much as a second hand big mac


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...








 Correct as that is generally the case with pro-Palestinian sources


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...








Indeed he is, and a pro-Palestinian LIAR as well


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 Correct because this is generally the case with pro palestinians


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really,  et al,
> ...








 Like your drivel do you mean rat boy


----------



## Humanity (Aug 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Changing words is one thing...

Actually understanding what you are writing is something different Phoney...

You clearly show that you don't understand the difference between 'people' and 'politics'... A fundamental zionist failing


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...







 And you clearly show that you are a JEW HATING RACIST by using the term Zionist out of context and in a racially abusive manner


----------



## rylah (Aug 4, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...




Oh please enlighten us on the difference between  'the people' and 'politics' and how this is a Zionist 'failing'. I'd be glad hear how You see it.

Maybe this model of 'people' vs 'politics' is more relevant and
"USEFULL" to Your taste:

_"We muslims have been *honored* to do BRAINWASHIG!"
_
Or this model of politics vs people:


----------



## Challenger (Aug 4, 2015)

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



2 MEMRI's, a Palwatch, and a programme made by Hard Cash Productions, not a fact in sight. Next.


----------



## rylah (Aug 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...




Show us the mistakes in those videos....Please.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

rylah said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...






 He cant do that, all he can do is rubbish the source because they show the reality that he cant bear to watch


----------



## rylah (Aug 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



So no errors then?  "Hard cash blah blah" 

Be a man.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 4, 2015)

rylah said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



MEMRI has a bad habit of "mistranslating" items from time to time; so has "credibility issues" neatly summarised here:
Selective Memri World news The Guardian
that, and the fact it was set up/owned by ex-IDF intelligence operatives make it highly suspect as regards objectivity.

Generally I have no interest in sound bites less than 5 minutes long, because they always fail to provide proper context.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 4, 2015)

rylah said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Only just logged in, some people just have no patience...


----------



## rylah (Aug 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



From the article You've posted:

_"Nobody, so far as I know, disputes the general accuracy of Memri's translations but there are other reasons to be concerned about its output."
_
What they select is their fashion...doesn't meant they lie,

Again- show us the ERRORS or be a man and admit a mistake.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


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


You only say that because you do not have the mental capacity to see the connection.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 And every time that others translate the words they get the same interpretation as MEMRI does. The words are usually underneath the video anyway so that even you can translate them if you want.

 So be a man for once rat boy and show where the videos are not factual.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 No connection to the thread what so ever as the thread is dealing with Gaza Army and not American cHRISTIANS.


----------



## aris2chat (Aug 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...



Hardly the first time muslim on video speak of hate or violence.  It will take a massive muslim reformation to change this.


----------



## aris2chat (Aug 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...




Most of the moderate muslim world don't want this sad image of islam translated and shared in the west.
Should these stores be selectively ignored?  Intentionally not translated?  Truths of what some are saying hidden from all but the radicals?

These are muslims speaking no some fabricated smear piece.  Maybe the speakers should be silenced and not those that translate these videos and stories for western eyes and ears.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 6, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



It took Europe well over a century for Catholics and Protestants to learn to get along and there are still legacy conflicts about today; and that was without outside interference. If the West and it's Zionist colony gets out of the region, the Islamic world will likewise sort themselves out. Of course that's not going to happen, the greatest fear the West has is the re-emergence of a united Caliphate in control of resources the West needs to survive. "Divide et Impera" is not a new concept.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 6, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



90%+ Westerners don't speak Arabic (or Israeli/modern Hebrew for that matter) so it's vitally important we get accurate, unbiased, translations consistantly. Misunderstandings and mistranslations can and do lead to conflict. MEMRI has demonstrated unreliability and bias, not least because, it was created, and is run by, ex-IDF intelligence personnel. Examples of alleged inaccuracies can even be found in Wikipedia:
Middle East Media Research Institute - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

and other sources:

Gained in translation - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition 
MEMRI Back Online After YouTube Backtracks Middle East Haaretz Daily Newspaper Israel News

For me sources must be have a minimum level of credibility and integrity to be considered trustworthy; if there's significant doubt, I'll either ignore them or treat their information with caution and scepticism until I get confirmation from sources I consider reliable.

Take the channel 4 dispatches program, the trick is to watch the program, then look around for any response that may exist, i.e.


Watch the response and then come to a reasoned, informed conclusion, not just treat one side or other as "gospel"


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 6, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...








 And because you are a rabid Jew hating racist it is always the "zionists" that have to get out of their nation, why not the islamonazi illegal immigrants and invaders. The muslims have had 1400 years to start getting along and it seems to be getting worse every month, new attacks on indigenous peoples so they can acquire more land through violence. Time the west stepped in and took out all the muslim extremists using Israel's methods of firing from afar at extremist enclaves. The Islamic world does not have the brain capacity or the inclination to sort itself out as all it knows is violence, murder and rape. Just look at the punishment for rape in Islamic nations, the death by stoning of the female who is the innocent party.

 Then the west should look for other resources and let the muslims start complaining over the loss of western money.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 6, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...







 problem is the words spoken are shown at the bottom of the screen and anyone can cut and paste them into a translator programme. So if yiou are too lazy to do that don't say MEMRI is lying.

Did he saw the words recorded if he did then he cant deny them, if a muslim translated his words then that is a reliable source . I saw the programme and it was not just one cleric in one mosque, but many clerics in many mosques around the country spouting the same racist inflammatory incitement to terrorism and violence. Because it was a neo Marxist government the authorities did nothing and swept it under the carpet, just as they did with the widespread child sex abuse. All for a handful of votes at the next elections.


----------



## rylah (Aug 6, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



From the articles You've linked:

_"Nevertheless, the institute is considered to lean right, and its work has been criticized in the past. Researchers and journalists have claimed that it* prefers to highlight extremist positions rather than more moderate ones*. "

Whitaker claims that although *Memri's translations are usually accurate*, they are selective and often out of context. He stated: "When errors do occur, it's difficult to attribute them to incompetence or accidental lapses... *there appears to be a political motive*."
_
Everybody has an agenda, ESPECIALLY those who play the 'interpretation card' and argue about words that mean the same when put in context. They want to SILENCE any critique of the Islamist invasion by saying it's selective-we have 'peaceful' muslims and it
insults them.

Memri was *closed and reopened 3 times after waves of alleged concerned users who claim that showing the face Fascist Islamism is inciting hatred.*
Basically they count on their big numbers, loud voices and western politeness JUST TO SHOOSH any resistance and block exposing their own blood libels and incitements.
Just like the did with the pogroms and threats to BBC

So yeah let's play word games, and we can reinterpret it  till cows go home but the message is the same. Plus haven't seen any legal claims against MEMRI- all muslim whining about being caught with their pants
down.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Damn near every insurgency claims to be freedom fighters of one sort or another.  Islamist and Jihadist most of all.


Except the problem with that is they are not insurgents.

Israeli settlers in the West Bank, are insurgents.
The IDF in Gaza, are insurgents.
Israeli citizens in East Jerusalem, are insurgents.
Israeli war planes bombing Syrian targets, are insurgents.
The Mossad providing material support to ISIS in the Golan Heights, are insurgents.

Hamas, is not insurgents.  It is the democratically elected government of Gaza.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 6, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Damn near every insurgency claims to be freedom fighters of one sort or another.  Islamist and Jihadist most of all.
> ...






Wrong again dildo as INTERNATIONAL LAW says the land of gaza, west bank and Jerusalem belongs to the Jews. This makes the Palestinians the insurgents, and it seems that you do not even know what insurgent means.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 6, 2015)

rylah said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



Interesting interpretations (your bolding); I on the other hand would have emphasised:

"..._*the institute is considered to lean right, and its work has been criticized in the past. Researchers and journalists have claimed that it prefers to highlight extremist positions rather than more moderate ones*."_

"_Whitaker claims that although Memri's translations are usually accurate, *they are selective and often out of context*. He stated: "*When errors do occur, it's difficult to attribute them to incompetence or accidental lapses... there appears to be a political motive."
*_
as more relevant when judging their reliability. In my view MEMRI is a part of Zionist Israel's Hasbara organisation.

I find it interesting also, that we never seem to get extremist translations from the Zionist side on MEMRITV...oh, forgot, the Zionists are all life-affirming, peace loving hippies that wouldn't say boo to a goose and have no exremists amongst them. but are continually threatened by those dastardly "Moooslims" chacun à son goût as they say.

Were MEMRI to highlight and translate Zionist Israeli extremist speeches, I might be persuaded to change my mind. I won't hold my breath...

As for word games, I defer to the master....


----------



## rylah (Aug 6, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



It's the 'Tariq Ramadan argument' of let's turn off all Islamist critique altogether, because SOME OF IT is not applicable to all.

So yeah no Islamist blood libel, no raising generations of martyrs through television, no muslim open call for annihilation, war and submission of the west.
Sure...MEMRI will continue to expose the savages as it does effectively.

They really think the average westerner is that naïve that he can be convinced by
bazar-fashion arguments and bargaining about peace and the exact meaning of foreign words.
MORE WESTERNERS KNOW ARABIC, HAD CONTACT WITH RADICAL MUSLIMS,
THAN ARABS WHO MET A WESTERNER.

You think this argument gonna stick? ACTIONS  SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
This bargaining about words is the symptom of Islam today which fights over different interpretations.
In the west we already have our interpretation of Islam that no smart ass Taqqya Immam gonna change. Simple.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


The major problem with MEMRI is that it will take the most wacko extremist and portray him as typical.

Not to mention that they sometimes fudge a little on translations.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 6, 2015)

rylah said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Where have I said "turn off all Islamist critique altogether"? I have serious reservations about MEMRI's integrity and motives and prefer to make judgements after looking at all the facts, not just the agenda driven, "Islamist blood libel, raising generations of martyrs through television, muslim open call for annihilation, war and submission of the west" sound bites that are so popular amongst a section of posters on internet forums.



			
				rylah said:
			
		

> They really think the average westerner is that naïve that he can be convinced by bazar-fashion arguments and bargaining about peace and the exact meaning of foreign words.



Oh look, an argumentum ad populum fallacy. 

I would argue the "average Westerner" is often convinced by slick bazar-fashion advertising and is usually far too lazy to gauge the meaning of words, we call them "Sun Readers" over here. People are rarely swayed by rational argument, but more often by the type of sound bite you keep offering up, like this one.



			
				rylah said:
			
		

> MORE WESTERNERS KNOW ARABIC, HAD CONTACT WITH RADICAL MUSLIMS, THAN ARABS WHO MET A WESTERNER.



Care to provide evidence for this assertion?


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...







 Yet you can take the words introduced as sub titles by the originators and translate them yourself, and get the same result. Far too many of these videos to say that they are not typical for the particular regime


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Indeed, but when the Palestinians speak for themselves you will not hear that kind of language.


----------



## rylah (Aug 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...




Like this?


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 When does hamas and fatah allow the Palestinians to speak for themselves then, as all we hear is the threats of more violence coming from hamas. When they have tried they have been massacred by armed and masked terrorists


----------



## rylah (Aug 6, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Well I'll tell You straight- I really don't care to search for any links on that. And frankly it was nonsense, however taken in proportion...
How many westerners travelled the world and saw thousands demonstrating, or went through humiliation and attacked (even if verbally) in their own hometowns.
But take I- I don't care, the last thing I said was nonsense...and MEMRI is a great tool and pretty much describes what's going on, even if partially...a thing muslim propagandists can't brag about.

Can You advice on other institutes?


----------



## fanger (Aug 6, 2015)

MEMRI does damage to the israeli people, in the eyes of those who know it is a tool


----------



## rylah (Aug 6, 2015)

fanger said:


> MEMRI does damage to the israeli people, in the eyes of those who know it is a tool



Those eyes no matter what they see will always scan for ways to blame and demonize Israel. MEMRI is not for convinced Fascist Islamists,
but for regular westerner who looks for reasons, evidence for the invasion of his Home town and reasons to wake up and stop being polite.

I think that even if there was a totally neutral  institute, it would still be blamed for exposing the Fascist Islamist and their openly declared agendas.

Any suggestions for such an Institute or you just whine by default?


----------



## fanger (Aug 6, 2015)

No need to look or scan for ways to blame and demonize Israel. by their fruits you will know them

As to evidence for the invasion of his Home town and reasons to wake up and stop being polite.
We only need to see the european jewish immigrants into Palestine taking over


----------



## rylah (Aug 6, 2015)

Yeah a start-up nation, full of talented and genius people who turned
an arab garbage field into a blossoming garden of innovation and success just under 50 years-
in spite of it being surrounded by numerous millions of hostile savages,
who blame all their incompetence on Israel and the joooooz.


----------



## fanger (Aug 6, 2015)

Maybe,but it was/is their field, the jews arrived to live in Palestine as immigrants, and refused to 
integrate


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 6, 2015)

fanger said:


> No need to look or scan for ways to blame and demonize Israel. by their fruits you will know them
> 
> As to evidence for the invasion of his Home town and reasons to wake up and stop being polite.
> We only need to see the european jewish immigrants into Palestine taking over






1400 years of Islamic atrocities, violence, land thefts and murder that is well documented, yet you still say look at Israel defending itself from invasion, violence and terrorism as if it was something bad.


Are you now going to say that the violent riots in the UK in the early 1900's were the fault of Israel, or will you just ignore them as you usually do whenever islamonazi violence and terrorism pre Israel is brought up.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 6, 2015)

rylah said:


> Yeah a start-up nation, full of talented and genius people who turned
> an arab garbage field into a blossoming garden of innovation and success just under 50 years-
> in spite of it being surrounded by numerous millions of hostile savages,
> who blame all their incompetence on Israel and the joooooz.


As one Bedouin explained it:

I used to have a house, and a garden, and olive trees, and livestock. Israel came and now I live in a tent in the sand.

Is that Israel's version of "making the desert bloom?"


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 6, 2015)

fanger said:


> Maybe,but it was/is their field, the jews arrived to live in Palestine as immigrants, and refused to
> integrate






 Just as most of the "Palestinians " did as well. And you forget that Jews also lived in Palestine and had the same rights as arab muslims to a homeland. Now why didn't the Ottomans give the arab muslims the land, instead of chasing them away all he time ?


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah a start-up nation, full of talented and genius people who turned
> ...






 Missing out that his house was stolen from a Jew, who tended the garden, planted the olive trees and raised livestock. What did he expect to happen when the Jews declared independence, for them to give them flowers and more land ?


----------



## rylah (Aug 6, 2015)

fanger said:


> Maybe,but it was/is their field, the jews arrived to live in Palestine as immigrants, and refused to
> integrate



The Hebrews arrived to JOIN their brothers and sister who continued their life in the Holy Land throughout the centuries.

When the arabs saw the growth and the variety of colors that Hebrew working people  generated (after all the garbage left by the same arabs for centuries)...they flooded the area to be vessels of political pressure...or simply to prepare the ground for their masters'
invasion into reviving Israel. 

Shalom.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


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


Link?


----------



## rylah (Aug 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Jerusalem


----------



## Challenger (Aug 7, 2015)

rylah said:


> Yeah a start-up nation, full of talented and genius people who turned
> an arab garbage field into a blossoming garden of innovation and success just under 50 years-
> in spite of it being surrounded by numerous millions of hostile savages,
> who blame all their incompetence on Israel and the joooooz.



Hasbara drivel. Prior to WW1 Zionist attempts to colonise Ottoman Palestine were spectacular failures. after WW1 when the British took over Palestine's economy and infrastructure had been devastated by the war so the Britsh poured in resources to rebuild and Zionists started to buy the best agricultural land  from absentee landowners (whose title was dubious anyway). By 1944 Jewish Zionist land ownership constituted no more than 6% of Palestine, so quite how they turned "an arab garbage field into a blossoming garden of innovation and success" is questionable. The garden was already there; Palestine already had a thriving economy under British rule and yes, Jewish finance was a contributing factor, but please, the well worn phrase "we made the desert bloom" is just a Zionist myth.

If you really want to learn about Palestine between 1917 and 1947, here's a good book I could recommend: One Palestine Complete Jews and Arabs Under the British Mandate Amazon.co.uk Tom Segev 9780349112862 Books

and a review by a Jewish academic, just in case you want to accuse me of bias:  One Palestine Complete Jews and Arabs Under the British Mandate Tom Segev - Lee - 2010 - Digest of Middle East Studies - Wiley Online Library 

Happy to help.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 7, 2015)

rylah said:


> fanger said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe,but it was/is their field, the jews arrived to live in Palestine as immigrants, and refused to
> ...



Hebrews?! Oh, good grief. Europeans who practiced Judaism maybe, Zionist nationalist irridentists definitely. "Hebrews" are extinct, as are "Canaanites", "Edomites", and all the other assorted tribal groups mentioned in the various religious texts. Several thousand years of wars, invasions, migrations, plagues have ensured that.  More Hasbara drivel.


----------



## Billo_Really (Aug 7, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Wrong again dildo as INTERNATIONAL LAW says the land of gaza, west bank and Jerusalem belongs to the Jews. This makes the Palestinians the insurgents, and it seems that you do not even know what insurgent means.


Post the international law that says that, troll?


----------



## Lipush (Aug 7, 2015)

fanger said:


> MEMRI does damage to the israeli people, in the eyes of those who know it is a tool



Just like Ha'aretz and Btselem


----------



## toastman (Aug 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah a start-up nation, full of talented and genius people who turned
> ...



Nice deflection.


----------



## toastman (Aug 7, 2015)

41


P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


why are you asking him for a link ?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Aug 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah a start-up nation, full of talented and genius people who turned
> ...



That's very interesting, considering Bedouins are nomads that are supposed to live in tents and not houses.  In fact, that's what caused all the problems lately between the Israeli government who wanted to build permanent housing for the Bedouins, and those who refused.  So, Tinmore, link please.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 9, 2015)

To the facts that Jordan took all the Jewish land in the west bank and Jerusalem and made it arab muslim. Well documented if you bother to look at the history books


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 9, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah a start-up nation, full of talented and genius people who turned
> ...








Just islamomarxist propagandas and LIES  again from rat boy because he cant handle the truth. How about some exerts from these books so we can see for ourselves what propaganda you are being fed with. instead of drumming up business for a book seller ?


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 9, 2015)

Just as arab muslims have been wiped out to be replaced with extremists, mass murderers, terrorists and jihadis.

 Your post is just more of your islamomarxist bullcrap and LIES.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 9, 2015)

Do you mean like this, which is something you can never do



The Avalon Project 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;

*ARTICLE 1.*
The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate.

*ART. 2.*
The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

*ART. 3.*
The Mandatory shall, so far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy.

*ART. 4.*
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.



 Detailed enough for you dildo, or do you want the coordinates as well of the proposed Jewish National home ?


----------



## aris2chat (Aug 10, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>Nobody, so far as I know, disputes the general accuracy of Memri'stranslations<<

You just don't like the choices that they translate.  It is the information may in the middle east causing trouble would rather the west not read, hear or see.  All the other is available from their own sources and releases so MEMRI is not needed, unless they make intentional mistakes and someone
sent a request to MEMRI for correction

It is not the translation but what MEMRI translates.  
Actually they translate both good and bad the it is the bad they draws so much attention


----------



## aris2chat (Aug 10, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...




Why don't you want the videos, speeches and text translated?  They are what they are and it is not the way they are translated but the fact that by translating them the west can know what is being said


----------



## aris2chat (Aug 10, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


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



~~~~~~~~~~~~
It is not just that tent are being used, but that they are often used too close to cities , dumbs or areas that are too far or dispersed to provide services to them.

People can just pitch a tent with herd animals in the west, anywhere they want.  Housing with water, electric, streets, fenced farms with barns and pens located just outside the towns a few minutes walk, regular garbage pick-up, schools, work space for businesses or local crafts and trade, stores, health care, etc. is better for them in small towns.  Even the rest of the middle east is moving bedouins to perminant housing, with spaces designated for tents on temporary basis, like park areas in the west.

This is just normal progress.  It is about zoning, sanitation, safety, health................


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 10, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Do you mean like this, which is something you can never do
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You left out the most important part.

*ART. 7.*


The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate *the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine. *​

The "Jewish national home" was to be Palestinian citizenship in Palestine.


----------



## fanger (Aug 10, 2015)

it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine


----------



## aris2chat (Aug 10, 2015)

Even in text, the source is there and anyone that can read arabic can see the original and know that it is translated correctly.  More people can speak arabic than can read it.  From spoken to text is not a direct one for one.  It is a bit like speaking a local tongue, but reading Shakespeare.  Then there is spoken arabic and numerous accents and slang.
Walk manhatten and then go harlem or BKLYN and they speak different.  Go from north to south and they speak different.  Read twain and compare that to a city news paper or vs.


----------



## Challenger (Aug 11, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



You forgot the rest of the sentance (just like MEMRI sometimes does) allow me "...but there are other reasons to be concerned about its output."


----------



## Challenger (Aug 11, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



On the contrary, I'm more than happy to have the videos, speeches and text translated; accurately and in context, not just sound bites from ex-Israeli intelligence personnel and stand-up comedians.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 11, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Do you mean like this, which is something you can never do
> ...








 Where does it say that in the mandate as I cant see it. What article 7 does say is that the Jews would be given the same rights to Palestinian citizenship as the arab muslims had to be BRITISH PALESTINIAN CITIZENS


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 11, 2015)

fanger said:


> it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine









 And the rest, that the arab muslims are still in breach of to this day.   Shown to be a NAZI JEW HATER AGAIN and letting it rule your head


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 11, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Wrong again. There were no British Palestinian Citizens.
-------------------
With regard to nationality of the inhabitants of mandated territories, in general, the Council of the League of Nations adopted the following resolution on 23 April 1923:

“(1) The status of the native inhabitants of a Mandated territory is distinct from that of the nationals of the Mandatory Power....
(2) The native inhabitants of a Mandated territory are not invested with the nationality of the Mandatory Power by means of the protection extended to them…”92​http://bcrfj.revues.org/6405#ftn92


----------



## toastman (Aug 11, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Do you mean like this, which is something you can never do
> ...



Those are for people who take up permanent residence in Palestine. 

There is no official definition of 'Jewish National Home'

The fact of the matter is, the Jews legally created a state, the same way the Palestinians did so.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 12, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Could you expand that instead of just saying it? Just saying it does not make it true.


----------



## Roudy (Aug 12, 2015)

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Blease...Balestinians are bery beastful beoble.


----------



## Roudy (Aug 12, 2015)

Challenger said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Does it matter what you think?  No.  Memri simply records and plays back the animals.  Simple as that.  Don't like it?  Tough Shiite.  Discredit all you want, it's the animals in their own words.


----------



## Roudy (Aug 12, 2015)

fanger said:


> it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine


About two million Arab Muslims are citizens of Israel with full rights.

That's about a third of Israelis.

Now fuck off.


----------



## Roudy (Aug 12, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



You mean your Arab Muslim friends can't tell you if the translations are correct?  You're just putting on this show because you know that Memri exposes your beloved PaliNazis.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 12, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Then why were they issued with BRITISH PALESTINIAN passports and BRITISH PALESTINIAN currency.

 They were distinct from the BRITISH CITIZENS

 They did not become BRITISH CITIZENS

 Keep trying as the evidenced shows you to be barking mad.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 12, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Oh for heaven's sake.  You understand this perfectly.



P F Tinmore said:


> Could you expand that instead of just saying it? Just saying it does not make it true.


*(REFERENCEs - In addition to that Previously Cited)*

I suppose that technically, an argument can be made that both of these Resolution, adopted by the General Assemble are enforceable principles _(quasi-Law)_ only to the extent that the UN Security Council has applied them.  But of course, this is subject to adjudication by International Legal authorities.  However, in most cases, in nearly every case, these two principles _(article specific)_ have been applied internationally as if they were common or customary law; without challenge.

217 A (III). Universal Declaration of Human Rights


Article 15:  A/RES/3/217 A

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.​
61/295. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples


Article 33:  A/RES/61/295
_Affirming_ that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, And to be respected as such, ...
​
(1)  Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions. This does not impair the right of indigenous individuals to obtain citizenship of the States in which they live.

(2)  Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the structures and to select the membership of their institutions in accordance with their own procedures.​
*(CONTEXT)*

When one cites the term "Palestine" relative to the border issues, one must recognize the time reference frame to which the term is applied.  

There is the "Palestine" of pre-Independence of Israel in which that designation applied to the territory to which the Mandate of Palestine was applicable (_Part 1--- Para 1 --- Palestine Order in Council_). 

Then, there was the duration in which the 1949 Armistice Agreements were intact.  A period in which the State of Israel co-existed with Sovereign Jordanian Territory called the West Bank, and the Egyptian Military Governorship of Gaza.  This was a period in which, for all practical purposed, the legal entity formerly known as "Palestine" under the Order in Council, was no longer subject to the Order in Council; only existing in an historical context.

Then, there was the 1967 Outbreak of Hostilities, in which both the West Bank and Gaza Strip came under Israeli Military Control _(Article 42 - Hague Convention 1907)_; territory occupied under the authority of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF); extending only where the IDF authority could be exercised.  The West Bank was still sovereign Jordanian territory; however the Gaza Strip was Occupied formerly All Palestine Government (APG) Territory _(an Egyptian Protectorate)_; the APG having been dissolved by the Egyptian Government in 1959.

Then, there was a period _(beginning in late-1988)_ in which the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), having been appointed by the Arab League as the sole representative of the Palestinian People, declared Independence on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the General Assembly Resolutions 181(II) (1947) --- and demanded that Israel's withdrawal from all the Palestinian and Arab territories which it has occupied since 1967, including Arab Jerusalem.  In acknowledgement, the UN then:

_Aware _of the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council in line with General Assembly resolution 181 (II) and in exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people,

1. _Acknowledges _the proclamation of the State of Palestine 

 by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988;

2. _Affirms _the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967;

3. _Decides _that, effective as of 15 December 1988, *the designation "Palestine" *should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;​
*(Sub-context and Palestinian Position)* _Source:_ PLO - Negotiation Affairs Department

*2. Key Facts *

The 1967 border *is the internationally-recognized border* between Israel and the oPt.
A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.
*(COMMENT)*

Without regard to arguments that have been advanced that Article 32 of the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) granted some special association or meaning with "Palestine", the intent of the article was to ensure that the citizenship established by the various Mandates was addressed and that no "stateless persons" were created in the breakup of the Ottoman Empire.


ARTICLE I6.

Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.​
The provisions of the present Article do not prejudice any special arrangements arising from neighbourly relations which have been or may be concluded between Turkey and any limitrophe countries.


ARTICLE 32.

Persons over eighteen years of age, habitually resident in territory detached from Turkey in accordance with the present Treaty, and differing in race from the majority of the population of such territory shall, within two years from the coming into force of the present Treaty, be entitled to opt for the nationality of one of the States in which the majority of the population is of the same race as the person exercising the right to opt, subject to the consent of that State.​
The Treaty of Lausanne did not have an practical effect on the application of either Nationality or Citizenship over the implementation of the process or the scope in which the Mandatory applied it:


REPORT BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT TO THE COUNCIL OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF PALESTINE AND TRANS-JORDAN FOR THE YEAR DECEMBER 1925 _(NOTE:  After the Treaty of Lausanne)_


The regulations under the Immigration Ordinance, 1925, set up a statutory procedure for the introduction of Jewish immigrant labour into Palestine. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council, 1925, facilitates the acquisition of Palestinian nationality by persons settling in the country, including those who opted for Palestinian citizenship under the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order in Council, 1922. There was a remarkable development of Jewish Co-operative Societies, constituted principally for building, agricultural and mutual credit purposes. Twenty-six Jewish companies were formed.
-----------------​The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence. 
-----------------​Article 5 of the Order facilitates the acquisition of citizenship by Jews who opted therefor under Article 2 of the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order in Council, 1922. The qualifications for naturalization are simple: two years' residence in Palestine out of the three years preceding application, good character, and the declared intention to settle in Palestine; knowledge of Hebrew is accepted under the literacy qualification. In special cases the High Commissioner is empowered to grant naturalization even if the period of residence has not been within the three years preceding application. Special naturalization offices have already been opened in Jerusalem, Haifa and Tiberias; and an officer is visiting the Jewish agricultural settlements in the north to receive applications on the spot.​
The position of the Mandatory was accepted without objection by the Order in Council.

The argument presented by the pro-Palestinian advocates that the Palestinians had some sovereign and pre-existing borders that were to prevent the legitimate establishment of Israel in 1948, pursuant to the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" adopted by the General Assembly under principle accepted under the Charter [_Chapter I - Article 1(2) (equal rights and self-determination of peoples)_] is simply a fallacy.  

The habitual Inhabitance were given citizenship within the Mandate to which they were resident.  This is a process that evolves depending on the sovereign authority or government holding or responsible for the territory.  As you (anyone) can see, in the case of Palestine it changed hands several times, and even completely consumed (non-existent) between 1949 and 1967.

It should be noted, that had it not been for the 1967 War, Palestine may have been totally lost to history, consumed by Israel, Egypt (Gaza) and Jordan (West Bank).

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 12, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Oh for heaven's sake.  You understand this perfectly.
> 
> ...







 Two points of note   that seem just wrong

 1)  you cant declare yourself a nationality unless the nation accepts you, if you could then every muslims would declare themselves American.

 2)  what 1967 borders are meant when two existed in 1967, pre war and post5 war.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 12, 2015)

Phoenall,  et al,

Yes, there seems to be a misunderstanding.



Phoenall said:


> Two points of note   that seem just wrong
> 
> 1)  you cant declare yourself a nationality unless the nation accepts you, if you could then every muslims would declare themselves American.
> 
> 2)  what 1967 borders are meant when two existed in 1967, pre war and post5 war.


*(COMMENT)*

POINT #1:  "you cant declare yourself a nationality unless the nation accepts you, if you could then every muslims would declare themselves American."

The intent is relative only to the "right of self-determination."  The Israelis declared their territorial sovereignty and independence.  Thus, they declared a independence by the "right of self-determination."  Similarly, the Arab-Palestinians declared independence.
POINT # 2:  what 1967 borders are meant when two existed in 1967, pre war and post war.


When, in April 1950, The Parliament of the Hashemite Kingdom _(Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented)_ unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, physically expanding the sovereignty of the Kingdom _(as a political result of the Jericho Conference of 1948)_, the permanent internationally recognized boundaries of around the West Bank were established; without regard to what countries approved of the action or disapproved.


*JERICHO CONFERENCE:*
"In December 1948 the Secretary of State authorized the US Consul in Amman to advise King Abdullah and the officials of Transjordan that the US accepted the principles contained in the resolutions of the Jericho Conference, and that the US viewed incorporation with Transjordan as the logical disposition of Arab Palestine.  The United States subsequently extended _de jure_ recognition to the Government of Transjordan and the Government of Israel on the same day, 31 January 1949."

867N.01/6–249

*Memorandum, Presumably Prepared by Ambassador at Large Philip C. Jessup1*
Paris, June 2, 1949.  top secret
In answer to a number of the points raised by Mr. Bevin with the Secretary and amplified by Mr. Wright to Mr. Jessup, the following preliminary comments can be made:


1. It is agreed that it would be desirable to secure agreement in principle before delineation of Israeli’s frontiers that water resources will be used for the benefit of all states concerned.
2. It is agreed that Abdullah should not enter into the suggested separate conversations in Jerusalem parallel to the Lausanne talks, and the United States Legation at Amman has been instructed so to advise the King.
3. It is agreed that it would be feasible for Transjordan to proclaim the incorporation of the administered Palestine territory in the near future with a proviso regarding the final boundary settlement at a later date. However, final decision on this point and also on the advisability of announcing the extension of the United Kingdom Treaty to cover the administered territories is reserved pending further consultations now in progress.
4. Further details will be communicated by the United States Embassy in London to Mr. Wright.
1Secretary Acheson sent the text of this memorandum to the Department in his telegram Actel 35, June 3, 9 a. m., from Paris, with the statement that he had handed Mr. Bevin the memorandum “Today” (740.00119 Council/6–349).​The boundary used for the purpose of Jordanian Sovereignty traced the Armistice Line; to be formalized at a later time.

I apologize if I did not make this more clear.  Most of these are after thoughts with me.  (Old Man Syndrome.)

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 12, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Oh for heaven's sake.  You understand this perfectly.
> 
> ...


You can forget this one.

A RES 61 295 - United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples - UN Documents Gathering a body of global agreements

I know you have posted it many times but it applies to indigenous people who live in territory that was conquered before it was illegal to acquire territory by force. The US and Australia, for example.

I don't see how it applies to Palestine.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 12, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Where do you come up with this stuff.



P F Tinmore said:


> You can forget this one.
> 
> A RES 61 295 - United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples - UN Documents Gathering a body of global agreements
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*



A/RES/61/295, a 1970 Resolution, has nothing in content of Declaration that may be used to deny the Israeli People their "right to self-determination," exercised in conformity with international law. It has only ONE global limitation - and it was not the one you suggested.  It affirms the application of the "right of self-determination," as stipulated in the UN Charter [Article 1(2) of the Charter (1945)], and as made applicable to the 1961Convention of Statelessness.  It _Recognizes and reaffirms_ "that indigenous individuals are entitled without discrimination to all human rights recognized in international law, and that indigenous peoples possess collective rights which are indispensable for their existence, well-being and integral development as peoples."  It embodies some of the exact same concepts and principles of the 1933 Convention on Rights and Duties of States, to include, but not limited to:

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:

a ) a permanent population;
b ) a defined territory;
c ) government; and
d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.​ARTICLE 3

The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts.​In terms of the Contemporary usage, A/RES/61/295 defines "Indigenous Peoples" and provides that "Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned. No discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right."  This, of course applies to the Jewish People that through the "right of self-determination" in 1948 - form the modern day State of Israel; as well as it does the Arab Palestinian People which, through the "right of self-determination" in 1988, formed the modern day State of Palestine.

Having said that, the 1970 A/RES/61/295 does have a limitation that you did not point-out.  The Declaration CANNOT retroactively take away or impair the vested rights of the Jewish State acquired under existing laws - treaties - charters - or conventions.  NOR can the 1970 Declaration creates new obligations, imposes new duties, or some other legal effect to actions already past.  It cannot implement _ex post facto_ law.  (It does not apply to either America or Australia; but it does apply (through the Charter) to the defense of Israel from external Arab Forces attempting to challenge the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel.

The State of Israel was not territory "acquired by force."  It was a state created by the "right of self-determination" _(under UN Guidance)_ and defended under Chapter VII - Article 51of the Charter (1945) from multiple Armed Arab Forces acting in violation of Chapter I - Article 2(4) of the Charter; use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state; as further articulated in the companion Resolution of 1970: the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (A/RES/25/2625):



Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.


Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to in the elaboration of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence.


Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.


Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.
Most Respectfully,
R


​


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 12, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Where do you come up with this stuff.
> 
> ...



ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:

a ) a permanent population;​Israel's "permanent population" was a bunch of recent immigrants. There was not a native in sight.
b ) a defined territory;​Israel had no defined territory. Israel defined no territory in its declaration of independence. Israel still has no defined territory.
c ) government; and​Israel's government was established by a foreign organization. A government derives its legitimacy by the will of the people. The government of Israel was created with the opposition of virtually the entire native population.
d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.​


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 12, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Oh for heaven's sake.  You understand this perfectly.
> 
> ...


What does the term "peoples" mean?


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 12, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

In the order in which asked ----



P F Tinmore said:


> ARTICLE 1
> 
> The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

•  Relative to the "Permanent Population:"

The principle of "immigration" or "native status" is not the defining criteria to a "permanent population."  YOU CANNOT just make-up your own version of the intent.  In the case of the territory to which the Mandate was applied, the criteria was:

*Article 7  Mandate for Palestine*
The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.​•  Relative to the "Defined Territory:"

As discussed in the "declarations and explanations" accepted by the General Assembly in Resolution 273 (III). Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations, the State of Israel did have delimitation of its territorial boundaries as originally established by General Assembly Resolution 181(II).  However, in the process of an active defense against multiple Foreign Arab Armies _(Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence)_, after exercising the "right of self-determination," these external foreign powers, together with the Palestinian Irregular Forces _(Holy War Army and the Arab Liberation Army)_ failed to militarily overpower the new State of Israel; and instead lost ground.  The attempt at a military conquest through the use of force was Arab, not Israeli.  In the half century since the illegal attempt to prevent the Jewish People from exercising their right to self-determination, no nation has prevented the Arab Palestinian from pursuing in good faith negotiations for the early conclusion of a universal treaty on territorial issues; except the Palestinian People themselves.​•  Relative to the issue of "Government:"

The process and procedures in the establishment conformed to the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" as outlined by the United Nations (Part I -Future constitution and government of Palestine) as stipulated in the 1947 Resolution.  It was overseen by the UN Palestine Commission which announced for the Public Record (17 May 1948) that:

"During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."​


P F Tinmore said:


> What does the term "peoples" mean?


*(UNITED NATIONS ANSWER)*

This comes up periodically, as if it has some significants --- germane to the issues at hand.   Here is the quote and the link.

*Culture and Knowledge *
*Indigenous peoples are* the holders of unique languages, knowledge systems and beliefs and possess invaluable knowledge of practices for the sustainable management of natural resources. They have a special relation to and use of their traditional land. Their ancestral land has a fundamental importance for their collective physical and cultural survival as peoples. Indigenous peoples hold their own diverse concepts of development, based on their traditional values, visions, needs and priorities.​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 When did it become international law as that will give you a clue as to when it applies from. Once again you attempt to use recent resolutions on acts from 68 years ago. The first mention of the acquiring land through force being illegal was in 1967 after the war.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







People plural. as in arab muslim peoples or Persian peoples.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 Not even those counted in the Ottoman census and the British census ?

 Read the mandate of Palestine that delineates the Jewish territory and grants that parcel of land under International law to the Jews.

As was the all Palestinian government that was mainly arab league members. So you point is moot and fails at the first hurdle.

 Which Israel has done repeatedly since 1949, the Palestinians have had no meaningful discourse over relations with other states.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 13, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> In the order in which asked ----
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link.

*Culture and Knowledge​*​
*Indigenous peoples are* the holders of unique languages, knowledge systems and beliefs and possess invaluable knowledge of practices for the sustainable management of natural resources. They have a special relation to and use of their traditional land. Their ancestral land has a fundamental importance for their collective physical and cultural survival as peoples. Indigenous peoples hold their own diverse concepts of development, based on their traditional values, visions, needs and priorities.​
It also said:

...they are the descendants - according to a common definition - of those who inhabited a country or a geographical region at the time when people of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived. *The new arrivals later became dominant through conquest, occupation, settlement or other means.*​

Of course this conquest was not illegal back in the day of the conquest of the US, Australia, etc.. It was illegal, however, when the Zionists conquered Palestine by military force in 1948.

The foreign Zionists did not fit the above description of indigenous people at all. They did not know the language or culture. They had no connection to the land. They had never been there. There was no ancestral connection.

The Zionist's stated goal from the beginning was to colonize, conquer, and occupy Palestine. To call that a "defensive" position is a serious load of crap.


----------



## theliq (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


Outstanding yet again Tinnie...trust you and the family are well..steve


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 The do explain how Arabic is a unique Palestinian language, have knowledge of the land and were able to sustain land productivity. Is that why they stole productive land from the indigenous Jews and destroyed it in 3 years by over use and under irrigation/feeding.

 How about details of the laws that made conquest of land illegal, bearing in mind that since 1948 the arab muslims have tried repeatedly to take Israel by force. They have also tried to take by force Kuwait, Iraq, Lebanon and Saudi. They have also taken by force most of the horn of Africa, former Yugoslavia, Philipines and parts of Europe. 

So from 1099 until the dying days of the Ottoman empire which indigenous group worked the land, had their own language and worshiped as they had for the preceding 3,500 years

 Did the Egyptians and Syrians know Hebrew or Aramaic then the indigenous language's for 4.500 years.

 The DNA of the majority of Jewish immigrants has been matched to that of Jewish bodies from 4,500 years ago, the only ones that don't are a few recent converts

 And your only source for this is some 19C writtingsthat have yet to be substantiated. But the arab muslims stated intent of conquest, genocide, enslavement and occupation is spouted every year.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 13, 2015)

theliq said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...







 Just the usual islamonazi LIES and propaganda that has never been substantiated by you or any other of the islamnazi stooges


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, yes!

If you want to apply that passage, you must remember the words and thought of the Allied Powers:

"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;"​
That is the "descendants - according to a common definition - of those who inhabited a country or a geographical region" that you should be looking for in the context of the original intent of the Allied Powers pertaining to the territory to which Turkey renounced all rights and title; the land the Ottoman Empire surrendered when it gave-up of all garrisons in Hedjaz, Assir, Yemen, Syria, and Mesopotamia to the nearest Allied Commander.



P F Tinmore said:


> It also said:
> 
> ...they are the descendants - according to a common definition - of those who inhabited a country or a geographical region at the time when people of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived. *The new arrivals later became dominant through conquest, occupation, settlement or other means.*​
> Of course this conquest was not illegal back in the day of the conquest of the US, Australia, etc.. It was illegal, however, when the Zionists conquered Palestine by military force in 1948.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Yes:  conquest, occupation, settlement or other means.  This is a matter of accent; not shopping for answers.

Your idea of "ancestral connection" and my idea of "ancestral connection" are vastly different.  Anyone who ignores the historical connection between Jewish People and the lands between the seas is simply not yet ready to examine the reality of the issue.

In terms of the 1948 "conquest," the Israelis were attacked and assumed the necessary defensive posture and organized a counteroffensive against the various hostile forces assembled by the Arab League.  The Arab attacked, and are repulsed by the heavily outnumbered Jewish defenders, --- then cry foul because they wound-up in a inferior military position.

Not all Jewish People are "Zionist."  Not all "Zionist" are extremists.  To be honest, I know very little about the Jewish People in terms of their religion and stance.  Over the years, I served with several; but my Sicilian cultural family manners usually prevailed and the subject of religion generally seldom developed.  I've heard Jewish People describe themselves as "orthodox" and "ultra-orthodox."   I've heard them say things like "they are more traditional or less traditional;" more non-observant or less observant.  There are Jews who may not be Orthodox, yet are opposed to the further expansion of Israeli territorial control; that recommend withdrawal from the West Bank _(Gaza having already been abandon)_.  I have met some that are outright sympathetic with the anti-Zionist cause _(which has a greater meaning to them than me; because they have the greater understanding)_.  Do I find any of this unusual?  NO!  It is all a matter of diversity and the distributive factor that effect cultural change.  At the end of the day, the Israelis will have to sort through the problems and resolve the situation themselves.  All that we can do as allies and friends, is to support them and ease what we can of the burden.

For the Hostile Arab Palestinian?  While my manners will prevail --- I doubt that I would go out of my way to assist those that have supported the pretenders to peace and freedom like the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (AAMB), Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), Izz ad-din al-Qassam Brigades (IAQB), Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)/General Command (PFLP-GC).  There is nothing that these activities do that either helps their people or promotes economic and cultural growth; involved too much in training the next general of terrorists.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 13, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, yes!
> 
> ...


In terms of the 1948 "conquest," the Israelis were attacked and assumed the necessary defensive posture and organized a counteroffensive against the various hostile forces assembled by the Arab League.​
For the fifty years before 1948 the Zionists, by word and action, specifically stated that they were going to take Palestine for themselves. And you call that "defensive."

You must be an old government person.

You people think funny.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 13, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, yes!
> 
> ...


If you want to apply that passage, you must remember the words and thought of the Allied Powers:

"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;"​
And you think those assholes had the right to do that.

You must be an old government person.

You people think funny.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 13, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, yes!
> 
> ...


Your idea of "ancestral connection" and my idea of "ancestral connection" are vastly different. Anyone who ignores the historical connection between Jewish People and the lands between the seas is simply not yet ready to examine the reality of the issue.​
Palestine is the birthplace of Christianity.

Does that mean that a bunch of Christians can go there, throw everybody out, and take the place for ourselves?

That's nuts.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 For 1200 years before 1948 the arab muslims mass murdered, enslaved, abused and mistreated the Jews and Christians throughout the Islamic lands. In 1921 they started a programme of attacks on Jewish enclaves that resulted in the formation of Jewish defence groups. Then in 1929 the grand mufti engineered the riots and massacres in Hebron . Then again in 1931 he engineered a civil war aimed at eliminating the Jews as he had stated he would.  So the words and actions of the arab muslims show that they were hell bent on taking all the land for themselves and to hell with the LoN and UN.
 You call firing illegal weapons at Israeli children defence along with planting high explosives under Israeli schools to mass murder children.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...





No the birthplace of Christianity was in Rome, remember that Jesus was a Jew who followed the Jewish religion. But Palestine was the birthplace of Judaism and Jews had lived there for over 4,500 years compared to the arab muslims who infested the land on and off for less than 1400 years.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 13, 2015)

*Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories and 'god-given land' claims *


----------



## Kondor3 (Aug 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> ...Palestine is the birthplace of Christianity. Does that mean that a bunch of Christians can go there, throw everybody out, and take the place for ourselves?...


It does, if (a) the Christians have the desire to do so, (b) the Christians have the willpower to do so, (c) the Christians have the muscle to do so, and (d) they actually try it.

Then again, Christianity already has various sectarian cities such as Rome and Moscow and Canterbury and Worms and others - as well as owning the Western Hemisphere, half of Oceania, Europe and all of northern Asia. No need for Christians to be take-on another.

In that respect, Christianity is much like Islam - dominating in a decent-sized chunk of the world and either in-possession-of or with access-to most of its Primary Holy Places and a lot of secondary and tertiary ones.

Other than Israel-Jerusalem, the Jews don't have any.

And they decided to take theirs back, after getting their asses kicked in the middle of the 20th.

The have (a) the desire to do so, (b) the willpower to do so, (c) the muscle to do so, and (d) they actually tried it, and largely succeeded.

The universe continues to unfold as it should.


----------



## theliq (Aug 13, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


"Infested" trouble with you Pheo and your Zionist Cronies is that your entire existence is based on a False Pretence


----------



## theliq (Aug 13, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > ...Palestine is the birthplace of Christianity. Does that mean that a bunch of Christians can go there, throw everybody out, and take the place for ourselves?...
> ...


Hardly the Universe Kondie,hardly think a tiny patch of land in the Holy Land,contitutes the Universe at all.........


----------



## theliq (Aug 13, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, yes!
> 
> ...


Rocco does it again..reinvents history in his own brains image..........there is a medical term for this...DELUSIONAL


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 14, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> *Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories and 'god-given land' claims *






  Only used by islamonazi's and their propagandist stooges. The Jews use the international laws of 1923 and 1949


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 14, 2015)

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 What false pretense would that be then moron as I maintain that INTERNATIONAL LAW  is the only factor in the Jews claim to Palestine. The arab muslims use LIES and false testimony for your claim to palestine


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 14, 2015)

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Yet you obsess with it like some OCD sufferer does with having the bottles lined up just so.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 14, 2015)

theliq said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 How about showing were he has reinvented history then and show the evidence of your fantasy history that has never existed.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 14, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


International law gave Palestine to the Jews. Pffft. *NOT!*


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 14, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...






Did it give it to the arab muslims, as I cant find it. But the Mandate of Palestine which passed into International law granted 22% of Palestine to the Jews for their national home. Then in 1949 the UN altered its charter to state that the UN would accept and fulfil the terms of the Balfour declaration, the Mandate of Palestine and the granting of gaza, west bank and the Golan heights. So why are you denying Israel and the Jews their human rights and rights under International law.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 14, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I'm not sure that our friend "Phoenall" said what you implied.

I don't think it was said that "International law gave Palestine to;" but rather "International law is the only factor in."  It is only a few words different, yet a huge difference in meaning.

I think that --- very consistently --- the argument has been that the Jewish State of Israel was created through the "right of self-determination." 



P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > What false pretense would that be then moron as I maintain that INTERNATIONAL LAW  is the only factor in the Jews claim to Palestine. The arab muslims use LIES and false testimony for your claim to palestine
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Unquestionably, there are many thing to consider if an equitable settlement of grievances is to be derived.

I think that the International Criminal Court (ICC) is going to find that they have, under political pressure, stepped into quick-sand and bog.  And in time, they will want to extricate themselves.  When we speak of International Law, we have to draw a timeline of events and determine what International Laws were applicable to what evens --- and the intent _(specifically addressed)_ within the law.  I don't think the court wants to extrapolate.  I don't think the court has the authority to create new interpretation that have the effect of new law.  This has very far reaching ramifications and entanglements; even unto the status of refugees _(if, in fact there are any in the West Bank or Gaza Strip)_.  I have the tendency to think that "if" the ICC takes-up the issue at hand _(a decision they have not yet made)_ there may be a whole basket full of unintended consequences that the Arab Palestinians never foresaw; and may work against them.  Of course the ICC will use, to the best of its ability, the limitation in jurisdiction to screen complications.  The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force (July 2002) of this Statute; it is 21st Century Law that is being applied to a conflict that started in the mid-20th Century.  And the ICC will, in all probability, us the limitation that "the definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 14, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I'm not sure that our friend "Phoenall" said what you implied.
> 
> ...


I think that --- very consistently --- the argument has been that the Jewish State of Israel was created through the "right of self-determination."​
There are UN resolutions stating that the Palestinians have the right to self determination, however, I can find nothing to substantiate your claim.

Link please.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 14, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The "right of self-determination" is not unique to the Arab Palestinians; it is a basic _(jus cogens)_ rule.  It is a "higher law" which must be followed by all.  It is a concept within international law that is a peremptory norm, arising from customary international law, but also recognized as a general principle of law. 



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...



*(COMMENT)*

*The LINK:* Chapter I - Article 1(2) of the UN Charter (1945).  This is the basic law cited in the Preamble of the Convention on Treaty Law, and in General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) (1960) again in General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV) (1970) "convinced that the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples constitutes a significant contribution to contemporary international law;" and as a cornerstone in Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights passed by the General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) (1966):  "All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development."


"By virtue of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, all peoples have the right freely to determine, without external interference, their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development, and every State has the duty to respect this right in accordance with the provisions of the Charter."
The idea that the "right of self-determination" would be denied to the Jewish People is absolutely absurd.  What is even more absurd is the fact that the very same General Assembly Resolution that was invoked by the Palestinians to Declare Independence --- "the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947" [that being General Assembly Resolution 181(II)] was in the document the Jewish People used in the "Step Preparatory to Independence."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## theliq (Aug 15, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The "right of self-determination" is not unique to the Arab Palestinians; it is a basic _(jus cogens)_ rule.  It is a "higher law" which must be followed by all.  It is a concept within international law that is a peremptory norm, arising from customary international law, but also recognized as a general principle of law.
> 
> ...


By the way Rocco,I was just teasing on my post above,I actually value your insightful posts......so I apologise for my post...but you know what I'm like LOL steve


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 And those resolutions have no powers in law as they are just recommendations. Whereas the Jews have international laws on their side that empower them to claim and hold all of the west bank and Jerusalem.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Like GA resolution 181. It *recommended* that the Security Council partition Palestine. The Security council never acted on resolution 181.

It didn't happen.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 15, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The "right of self-determination" is not unique to the Arab Palestinians; it is a basic _(jus cogens)_ rule.  It is a "higher law" which must be followed by all.  It is a concept within international law that is a peremptory norm, arising from customary international law, but also recognized as a general principle of law.
> 
> ...


Thank you for the links. They fit the Palestinians perfectly. The Jews not so much.

One term common among them is "peoples." What does that mean? I had previously asked for a definition but received no response.

People are categorized into groups based on nationality and citizenship inside defined territories. The French are "a people." The British are "a people. The Palestinians are "a People." These groups together are peoples.

The Jews, however, are defined by religion with many nationalities. They are not a people in the nationalistic sense.

When they use terms like the right to self determination without external interference, the right to independence and sovereignty, the right to territorial integrity, they are specifically referring to nations of people in defined territories not loose groups of people.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Yes it did as the UNSC passed the resolution.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







Get it right what you really mean is you did not get the definition that met with your approval because it applied to the Jews as well as the arab muslims.

 Problem is that the Palestinians happen to also be Jews, Christians and other religions other than arab muslim. This means each one has a seperate claim to a nation. The arab muslims had already been granted 78% of Palestine leaving the Jews and Christians to have the other 22%.

The Jews always were and always will be a nation, and it is only islamonazi scum that try and take away that from them. The INTERNATIONAL LAW of 1923 enacted by the LoN clearly states that they would be granted the land for their national home, making them a people in the nationalistic sense.

When did the arab muslims ever have defined territories as they flit from one owner to the next like a fly round a communal toilet, handing their lands to them to do with as they please. They had two owners from 1948 till 1967, then none from 1967 till 1988.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

In many regards, we'll have to agree to disagree.



P F Tinmore said:


> One term common among them is "peoples." What does that mean? I had previously asked for a definition but received no response.


*(COMMENT)*

I think you alzheimer's symptom is getting the best of you.  I've addressed this many times for you and even given you the UN Link to the Fact Sheet on:  "Who are indigenous peoples?"

•  Culture and Knowledge 

Indigenous *peoples* are the holders of unique languages, knowledge systems and beliefs and possess invaluable knowledge of practices for the sustainable management of natural resources. They have a special relation to and use of their traditional land. Their ancestral land has a fundamental importance for their collective physical and cultural survival as peoples. Indigenous peoples hold their own diverse concepts of development, based on their traditional values, visions, needs and priorities.​
Additionally, I'm sure, given the number of times you have used this particular ploy, that I have given you the *U.S. National Security Council, Position on Indigenous Peoples (January 18, 2001) *on the issue.



P F Tinmore said:


> Like GA resolution 181. It *recommended* that the Security Council partition Palestine. The Security council never acted on resolution 181.
> 
> It didn't happen.


*(COMMENT)*

You and the rest of the like-minded pro-Palestinians (different Palestinians from those that Declared Independence) can take that position if you want.  The UN and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (the sole representative of the Palestinian people), may have a different take on the matter.


•  Press Release PAL/169 17 May 1948:  "The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 *has been implemented*."
•  A/43/827  S/20278 18 November 1988:  Palestinian Declaration of Independence.  "Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the *international legitimacy* embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947."
•  A/53/879  S/1999/334 25 March 1999:  Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations.  "For the Palestinian side, and since the strategic decision to forge a peace on the basis of coexistence, resolution 181 (II) has become acceptable. The resolution provides the legal basis for the existence of both the Jewish and the Arab States in Mandated Palestine. According to the resolution, Jerusalem should become _a__corpus separatum__,_ which the Palestinian side is willing to take into consideration and to reconcile with the Palestinian position that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territory and the capital of the Palestinian State. The *Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy* and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process."
•  A/RES/43/177  15 December 1988:  Question of Palestine.  "_Recalling _its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, in which, _inter alia_, it called for the establishment of an Arab State and a Jewish State in Palestine,"
•  A/RES/67/19  4 December 2012:  Status of Palestine in the UN.  "_Recalling_ its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947."​
For something that "didn't happen," it sure got a lot of recognition.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 15, 2015)

theliq,

No need to apologize.



theliq said:


> By the way Rocco,I was just teasing on my post above,I actually value your insightful posts......so I apologise for my post...but you know what I'm like LOL steve


*(COMMENT)*

I chalk it off to the passion of the debate; and the moment.

v/r
R


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






Irrelevant as the Jews used the LoN mandate of Palestine and their right to free determination to declare the state of Israel. The UN had no say in the matter, and so the passing of 181 has no outcome on the situation.



Resolution 181 has no legal ramifications – that is, Resolution 181 recognized the Jewish right to statehood, but its validity as a potentially legal and binding document was never consummated. Like the proposals that preceded it,
Resolution 181‟s validity hinged on acceptance by both parties of the General Assembly‟s recommendation.  Cambridge Professor, Sir Elihu Lauterpacht, Judge ad hoc of the International Court of Justice, a renowned expert on international law, clarified that from a legal standpoint, the 1947 UN Partition Resolution had no legislative character to vest territorial rights in either Jews or Arabs. In a monograph relating to one of the most complex aspects of the territorial issue, the status of Jerusalem, Judge, Sir Lauterpacht wrote that any binding force the Partition Plan would have had to arise from the principle pacta sunt servanda, [In Latin: treaties must be honored – the first principle of international law] that is, from agreement of the parties at variance to the proposed plan. In the case of Israel, Judge, Sir Lauterpacht explains: “The coming into existence of Israel does not depend legally upon the Resolution. The right of a State to exist flows from its factual existence-especially when that existence is prolonged shows every sign of continuance and is recognised by the generality of nations.”12 Reviewing Lauterpacht‟s arguments, Professor Stone, a distinguished authority on the Law of Nations, added that Israel‟s “legitimacy” or the “legal foundation” for its birth does not reside with the United Nations‟ Partition Plan, which as a consequence of Arab actions became a dead issue. Professor Stone concluded:  “The State of Israel is thus not legally derived from the partition plan, but rests (as do most other states in the world) on assertion of independence by its people and government, on the vindication of that independence by arms against assault by other states, and on the establishment of orderly government within territory under its stable control.”13 



http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/10/Resolution-181.pdf


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 15, 2015)

Phoenall,  et al,

Yes, in the grand sense, our friend "Phoenall" is correct.  The General Assembly Resolution 181(II) (Partition Plan) is not an separate authority in itself.  The authority comes from the people (the Jewish Peoples right to self-determination),  The Resolution had three key aspects to it.

First, it was a road map to independence; a recommended process by which the parties concerned, could establish independence that would be acceptable to the General Assembly.  This road map was titled the "Steps Preparatory to Independence."

Second, if the parties agreed and followed the prescribed steps, then the UN agreed to give recognition to the states.

F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS​When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.​
Third, the Resolution was never intended to be a "binding" resolution (a UN decree) by a mutually beneficial agreement between the agreement between the UN and the two parties (UN and the Arab State --- UN and Jewish State), and not an agreement binding between the UN and the two states of a binding agreement between the two states.



Phoenall said:


> Irrelevant as the Jews used the LoN mandate of Palestine and their right to free determination to declare the state of Israel. The UN had no say in the matter, and so the passing of 181 has no outcome on the situation.


*(COMMENT)*

The binding application is that portion of the UN Charter that recognized that both the Arab and the Jewish people had the right to self-determination.  What happened is that the Arabs rejected the notion that the Jewish People had a right equal to their own.  That the land, surrendered to the Allied Powers, was somehow, by some right, their sovereign territory; theirs sovereignty and theirs alone.  There is actually nothing to support that conclusion.

Further, it is to the State of Israel's advantage if the Arab Palestinians actually  win the day in terms of the* international legitimacy* and respect General Assembly Resolution 181 (II), and its recommended guidance.  If this were to be de-legitimized in terms of Israel and its Declaration of Independence, then it would be equally de-legitimized in terms of the Palestinian's Declaration of Independence; on which they state:   "Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the *international legitimacy* embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947;" a leg on which they base their independence.

Further, the de-legitimacy of the Resolution also then negates any May 1948 boundary assumption and thus, would no represent a limiting factor in the lost or gains of territory in respect to the outcome of the conflict in which the Israeli was the defender and the Arab were the attacking aggressor.  The territory on which the Israeli assumed control was not an outcome of capture by conquest and/or war, but the outcome of a Civil War in which the Palestinians, claiming all of the former territory to which the Mandate Applied, challenged the immigrants for sovereignty and lost.  In fact the Arab Palestinians still hold that claim; although not the territory.

More interesting is how the international legal community is going to define the nationality and citizenship of the Palestinians, given that many of them have lost nationality, and voluntarily acquired a new nationality, enjoyed the protection of the new nationality; THEN, declared independence.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 15, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> In many regards, we'll have to agree to disagree.
> 
> ...


I've addressed this many times for you...​
Indeed you have but your links apply to indigenous people who lost their country to conquest before it was illegal to do so. I don't see how they apply to the Palestinians.

You really should not use the PA/PLO in the same sentence with the Palestinians. The PLO started going weird in the 1970s. They made that useless declaration of independence in 1988. Then they virtually sold out when they got suckered into signing Oslo. Of course they did the above without the consultation or approval of the people.

Here is some background on the PA/PLO.

Oslo s Roots Kissinger the PLO and the Peace Process


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Who says that they had to get the approval of the people, after they had been given the peoples approval to represent them. You are another of these semi literate Islamics that does not understand how politics work. They did not need the Palestinians people's approval as that was a foregone conclusion.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore, et al,

I am not sure what you point is.



P F Tinmore said:


> Indeed you have but your links apply to indigenous people who lost their country to conquest before it was illegal to do so. I don't see how they apply to the Palestinians.


*(COMMENT)*

Are you saying that there is no application of the term "indigenous peoples" to the Palestinians?



P F Tinmore said:


> You really should not use the PA/PLO in the same sentence with the Palestinians. The PLO started going weird in the 1970s. They made that useless declaration of independence in 1988. Then they virtually sold out when they got suckered into signing Oslo. Of course they did the above without the consultation or approval of the people.


*(COMMENT)*

Are you saying that the Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine Rabat, Morocco 28 October 1974 that established "the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated," has no legitimacy?



P F Tinmore said:


> Here is some background on the PA/PLO.
> 
> Oslo s Roots Kissinger the PLO and the Peace Process


*(COMMENT)*

The leadership behind the Palestinian People has been so convoluted over the years, that it hardly makes a difference what or how that leadership managed its administration over four decades ago.  Governments evolve.

I ask again...   What is your point?  Be clear.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 16, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I am not sure what you point is.
> 
> ...


No, I am just saying that those resolutions do not fit Palestine's situation. This is more applicable.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration



> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > You really should not use the PA/PLO in the same sentence with the Palestinians. The PLO started going weird in the 1970s. They made that useless declaration of independence in 1988. Then they virtually sold out when they got suckered into signing Oslo. Of course they did the above without the consultation or approval of the people.
> ...


The fact is that the Palestinians have never had much to do in choosing their own leaders. For the most part they have been imposed on them by outsiders. Palestine was born under occupation and that continues today.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore, et al,
> ...






 Wrong unless you are saying that Palestine was colonised by Egypt and Jordan as that is who colonised their lands in 1960.

Yes and that is the fault of who in the real world, maybe if they had stopped being violent and terrorists as far back as 1947 maybe they would now be rich and prosperous. Every leader they have had has been forced on them by the arab muslims and no one else.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 17, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I am not sure what you point is.
> 
> ...


The leadership behind the Palestinian People has been so convoluted over the years,...​


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 17, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore, et al,
> ...







 Because the Palestinians have no concept of free determination, and just leave it up to others to decide their fate


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 17, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.



P F Tinmore said:


> No, I am just saying that those resolutions do not fit Palestine's situation. This is more applicable.
> 
> The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration


*(COMMENT)*

In 1960, the West Bank was under Jordanian Sovereignty; established by the Jordanian parliament a decade before ---  and remained so until 1988.  This was a political action in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented in the Jordanian Parliament.   The motion was unanimously approved through Parliament and with the consent of the Palestinian People _(right of self-determination)_.  This was not a move by any colonial power.    So, essentially, from the time of the Arab League invasion (1948), until the Disengagement from the West Bank by Jordan in EOM July 1988, by the consent of the Palestinians, the West Bank was under Jordanian control _(military occupation until April 1950, and __sovereignty__ through July1988)_.  If there was a Colonial Power _(establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory)_, it would have been The Hashemite Kingdom.  BUT, since the Palestinians of the West Bank were deeply involved in the annexation of the West Bank, and that the West Bank was annexed through the consent of the people, it is not really a colonial action.

Similarly, the Gaza Strip was (theoretically) was under the quasi-Administration of the "All Palestinian Government" (APG), under the umbrella protection of the Egyptian Military Governorship from the time of the Arab League invasion (1948) until the Egyptian Government dissolved the APG in 1959.  From that point forward, and until the Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt, the Egyptian Military Governorship maintained control over the Gaza Strip.  Again, if there was a Colonial Power _(establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory)_, it would have been Arab Republic of Egypt.

In time of the Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine --- Rabat, Morocco 28 October 1974; the Arab League _(as the regional authority of Arabs)_ recognized an independent national authority under the command of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated. This authority, once it is established, shall enjoy the support of the Arab states in all fields and at all levels.  In 1974, the West Bank was still sovereign Jordanian territory; not liberated Palestinian territory.   And again, the Gaza Strip was still under the Military Governorship; which did not change until the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979.



P F Tinmore said:


> The fact is that the Palestinians have never had much to do in choosing their own leaders. For the most part they have been imposed on them by outsiders. Palestine was born under occupation and that continues today.


*(COMMENT)*

The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership.  The Palestinians merely forfeited their options and allowed their opportunities to be exploited by other Arabs.

The Palestinians had essentially the same opportunities as the Israelis; they just could not make it work for them.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 17, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.
> 
> ...


When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.​
Politics and propaganda have changed. Legalities have not.

I have a question that will not be answered.

If Israel occupied the Jordanian territory of the West Bank in 1967, why did Jordan relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988?

Your post does not make any sense.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 17, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.
> 
> ...


The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership.​
Yeah, like their election of Hamas in 2006.

Not to mention that Britain arrested, exiled, or killed Palestinian leaders all through the Mandate period.


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 17, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Humm.  There are always answers.  It is just that some of the answers you don't like.  Remember the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan did not "relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988;" as you suggest.  "On July 31 1988, King Hussein announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank."  Under Article 1(1) of the Convention Relating to Stateless Persons:

•  "For the purpose of this Convention, the term “stateless person” means a person who is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its law."​
By default and under the unified Arab League Resolution of 28 October 1974 (Rabat), when Jordan broke all ties with the West Bank, the PLO became sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people of the West Bank; who would have become stateless otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 17, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

This is confusing.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Mandate Periods ended in 1948.  That is 48 years (nearly half a century) before the election of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), and a recognized terrorist organization.   The Palestinians have the right to select their own government; but they must also be willing to accept the consequence of their actions.  If the Palestinians want to elect and further a government that supports terrorism, they must be able to deal with the outcomes they created.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 17, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> This is confusing.
> 
> ...


The US had a similar problem when Jordan handed the West Bank to the PLO. The US name calling thing prevented them from dealing with the PLO.

They eventually got over it and are now dealing with the PLO.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 Only to you because you refuse to understand the situation. The Palestinians rose up against their leaders and tried to take over control of Jordan through violence and terrorism and paid a heavy price. Some reports say 50,000 Palestinians in concentration camps were mass murdered in one month, this was twice the number killed in battles with Israel, leading to strained relationships and hatred of the Palestinians. The Jordan government started to distance themselves from the west bank, and finally instigated a split that left the Palestinians out on a limb with no leadership or nationality. The now extinct all Palestine government last action was to appoint the PLO and Arafat as the leaders of Palestine hoping that Israel would do the job of destroying the PLO for them.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 You mean branding the terrorist killers terrorist killers, because that is what they were and are psychopathic islamist mass murderers.
 The US is not dealing with mass murdering terrorists at all, they are dealing with the P.A. through third parties


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 You mean foreign insurgent terrorists and agitators don't you, they were never Palestinians by birth. The same people claimed to be Iraqi's after Desert Storm but came from other parts of the Islamic world.


----------



## aris2chat (Aug 18, 2015)

Lets see the detail of this 8 yr truce between hamas and Israel 
a step in right direction.  so far it sounds reasonable enough


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Lets see the detail of this 8 yr truce between hamas and Israel
> a step in right direction.  so far it sounds reasonable enough


It is an interesting thought.  The idea is to stop *all* violence from both sides and later on work on a peace agreement when people are not shooting at each other.

It is worth discussing. Nothing else has worked for the last hundred years.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 18, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Humm.  There are always answers.  It is just that some of the answers you don't like.  Remember the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.
> 
> ...


Of course this is after the fact. The Palestinian's stateless status is due to illegal external interference and illegal military conquest. The violation of several international laws are at play here. Enforcing resolution 1514 would be a remedy for these violations.

Here are some interesting concepts.


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 They are stateless at their own request because to declare a state means they would be destitute and have to start selling the family silver.

 By the way there is no legal right of return, and the UN has spelt out the criteria that the Palestinians need to hit before they will be granted a right of return. very soon it will be moot anyway as the last Palestinian refugee dies and there are no more left


----------



## RoccoR (Aug 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

This brings up an interesting set of questions?



P F Tinmore said:


> Of course this is after the fact. The Palestinian's stateless status is due to illegal external interference and illegal military conquest. The violation of several international laws are at play here. Enforcing resolution 1514 would be a remedy for these violations.
> 
> Here are some interesting concepts.


*(COMMENT)*

Is the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly --- 1514 (XV) Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (A/RES/15/1514  14 December 1960):

•  Binding and enforceable?
•  What is the enforcement authority?
•  What is the date this Resolution went into force?​
Let's assume _(for the sake of this discussion)_ that these first three questions are irrelevant.

•  Who is the Plaintiff?
•  Who represents the Plaintiff?
•  Who is the Defendant in the complaint?
•  What specific complaint, outlined in the Resolution, is alleged?
•  When did the alleged complain occur?
•  What is the means of restitution for the complaint in settlement?​
I would suggest that:

1.
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 The Arab Palestinian are NOT the target of Israeli subjugation, domination and exploitation that would constitutes the denial of fundamental human rights.  

2.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That the Israelis have the same right to self-determination as that of the Arab Palestinian; including the right to determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development. 

3.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That the Israeli did not use the indecency of Palestinian political, economic, social or educational ill preparedness or capacity to implement sound governmental functions served as a pretext for delaying independence; and in fact the Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination.

4.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That Palestinian armed action and Jihadist measures of all kinds directed against the Israeli peoples never cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of the State of Israel's national territory was never truly respected.

5.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That the territories, beyond the boundaries assumed by the State of Israel as sovereign, have been under Arab independence _(in one form or another)_, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, except for the measures necessary to protect Israeli sovereignty pursuant to Article 51 of the Charter; and in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1373:

•  Israel taking the necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts, including by provision of early warning to other States by exchange of information; 
•  Israel implementing countermeasures to deny Arab Palestinians the opportunity to provide safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist acts, or provide safe havens;
•  Israel acting in such a manner that would prevent those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts from using their respective territories for those purposes against Israeli sovereign integrity, the other States, or their citizens;​6.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Israel defends itself against any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity, the territorial integrity of its sovereignty, and the protection and safety of its citizenry from hostile rocket and mortar attacks, hijacking, suicide bombing, kidnapping and murder to assert their demands that were beyond their ability to achieve through good faith negotiations settlement of their disputes with Israel by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement.     

7.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 That to the extent possible, Israel has attempted to observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality.  That to the extent possible, given the active threat of Jihad and armed aggression made by Arab Palestinian representative, and the lack of respect for the sovereign rights of the Israeli peoples and their territorial integrity, the Israelis have attempted to operate within the parameters of the the Hague and Geneva Convention.​Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Aug 18, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> This brings up an interesting set of questions?


Indeed, that is what I do.



> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Of course this is after the fact. The Palestinian's stateless status is due to illegal external interference and illegal military conquest. The violation of several international laws are at play here. Enforcing resolution 1514 would be a remedy for these violations.
> ...


​As you know, the UN cannot create law. However it does compile resolutions based on pre existing international law and its own charter. The date of the resolution does not necessarily mean that the referenced laws did not start until then.


> Let's assume _(for the sake of this discussion)_ that these first three questions are irrelevant.
> 
> •  Who is the Plaintiff?
> •  Who represents the Plaintiff?
> ...


Here is where you get into slime, speculation, smokescreen, and lies.

BTW, you have never posted anything showing where foreigners have superior rights to the indigenous population.

How about posting a map of Israel without armistice lines that are specifically not to be borders. Israel's territorial integrity???



> 1.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## Phoenall (Aug 19, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 The UN can compile law when the majority of its members agree that what they say will be law. They do not compile resolutions based on existing law as the existing law is enough. But they do enforce those laws through their legal arm and with armed intervention.


 Then we must also make the rest of the questions irrelevant, you cant pick and choose what aspects you want to use because they meet with your POV while others destroy your POV


 You have never posted anything that shows arab muslim immigrants had more rights than indigenous Jews in 1948

 How about you post a map showing the nation of palestines borders in 1917, 1923, 1948, 1949 and 1988 ?


----------

