# Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error

Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error



> Jerusalem (AFP) - Most Palestinians believe the renewal of peace talks with Israel was a mistake and over two thirds think the negotiations will fail, according to a poll released Wednesday.




A function of Palestinian Mentality is to forever claim victimhood for their self-inflicted ills, pratfalls and self-imposed disasters.

The attitudes expressed by Palestinian Arabs are not surprising.  I suspect there is a certain realization on their part that statehood carries many obligations, one of which is viability. Its unlikely that an armed islamic terrorist encampment could survive as a viable entity. Absent a dedicated UN welfare agency to prop up this disaster, the Palestinians would quickly find themselves unable to cope with the maintenance of civil affairs.


----------



## Lipush (Nov 28, 2013)

Peace talks are  joke. We release prisoners and get nothing in return


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Peace talks are  joke. We release prisoners and get nothing in return



Then why do you take so many prisoners?


----------



## Lipush (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Peace talks are  joke. We release prisoners and get nothing in return
> ...



I agree. Terrorists should be killed on the spot, not be jailed.

I hear ya.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Peace talks are  joke. We release prisoners and get nothing in return
> ...



Your whining is typical of the selective whining that oozes from Islamic terrorist huggers. 
Israel had made efforts both by way of releasing Islamic terrorists from her prisons and by ceding land in exchange for peace. But its never enough for the Palestinian Arab beggars and squatters. 

As suggested by the article below, so-called "Palestinian" Arabs are of little use to the Arab world except as fodder for maintaining Arab/moslem fascism.    


*Palestinian Authority's Double Standards on Prisoners*

Palestinian Authority's Double Standards on Prisoners :: Gatestone Institute



> While the Palestinian Authority continues to demand the release of Palestinians from Israeli jails, it has long been ignoring the fact that thousands of Palestinians are languishing in prisons in several Arab countries.
> 
> The families of the prisoners held by Israel at least know where their sons are and most visit them on a regular basis.
> 
> ...



The more pertinent question is why are you such a horses' ass?


----------



## patrickcaturday (Nov 28, 2013)

> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error
> ...




*A function of Israeli Mentality is to claim that others are whining when they are the masters of the whine.  About the only thing in your post that has any basis in reality is the fact that one of the requsites of a Palestinian State would be viability, but the simple fact of the matter is that Israel has done almost everything in it's power to make that impossible.  Not only do the roads and the settlements carve up the land into small isolated districts but also the Israelis with their settlements and aparthied wall control over 70% of the areas water thus making agriculture a virtually impossible enterprise !!!
You show me nothing with your posts but an anti-Palestinian phobia.*


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error
> 
> Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error
> 
> ...


"Self inflicted ills"?  Man, your thought process is really FUBAR!

The Pals position is the result of realizing Israel breaks every deal they enter into and their word don't mean shit!


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 28, 2013)

Lipush said:


> I agree. Terrorists should be killed on the spot, not be jailed.
> 
> I hear ya.


The problem is, you consider people fishing and farming are terrorists.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error
> 
> Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error
> 
> ...



Yes, while Israel continually reaches out for peace, the Palestinians don't want peace at all which is why they have always stalled seeking peace.

Poll: Majority of PA Muslims Support Suicide Bombings
Survey shows dangers of turning a blind eye to Palestinian Authority-sponsored religious hatred, casts doubt on prospects for peace.

Majority of PA Muslims Support Suicide Bombings - Middle East - News - Israel National News


----------



## toastman (Nov 28, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > I agree. Terrorists should be killed on the spot, not be jailed.
> ...


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

patrickcaturday said:


> > Hollie said:
> >
> >
> > > Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error
> ...



Yep. The _Eternal Victim Mentality_ AKA _Palestinian Mentality_ seems to be a communicable disease.

Consider: You love life, We love Death. 

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for a productive and fruitful life, especially in connection with welfare cheats who have no incentive for building a productive society. Unfortunately, _Palestinian Mentality_ speaks volumes about the human condition of ignorance and a politico-religious perspective which devalues life. Those who are unfettered by a moral compass and who place such little value on life can be expected to throw their children to the trash heap. Oh, the dangers of a politico-religious ideology that is so closely tied to violence and regression.

I cant recall the massive number of opinion pieces, op-eds, commentaries and articles that spoke to the sheer lunacy of Israel ceding land to islamic terrorists and their enablers as it relates to Israels withdrawal from Gaza. For a brief moment, the Pal-Arabs had an opportunity to step back, reassess and evaluate an opportunity to show the world that they could meet adversity and build a productive society. What happened: The area, under Pal/Arab stewardship has become a no-mans land of wanton terrorist vs terrorist bloodshed and murder.

The overwhelming consensus among the various opinions dealing with Gaza and the _Palestinian Mentality_ was that the Gaza greenhouses, the fertile lands created by Israel, and the economic benefits created by the Israelis would all be lost. They were. The Pal/Arabs wasted no time in looting, burning and rendering all those Israeli improvements nil. 

Why should the "Pal"-Arabs spend even a moment actually working for a living when there is an entire U.N. funded welfare agency dedicated to maintaining their invented "nationality"?


You show me nothing in your posts but incessant whining.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Most Palestinians see fresh peace talks as error
> ...



Another one suffering from _Palestinian Mentality_.

Not to worry, sweety. The UN welfare checks will continue to drench the Arab beggars and squatters with those Infidel checks.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


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



Indeed, yet another burden that Israel gave to the world.


----------



## toastman (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


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





Stop it, just stop it Tinmore. You're beginning to match Sherri's stupidity on Israel related issues


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Of course, "I blame the Jooooos". 

It never occurred to your that the Islamic terrorist haven in "Palestine", could have chosen to build a productive society with those billions upon billions of Infidel welfare dollars. 

But hey, money for weapons and ammo to fight the jihad just falls off the Infidel tree.

Pearls before swine, child. Your synapses are on a permanent cease fire.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

toastman said:


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



I know if I were Tin-less, I'd hate to have someone think that cliché' ridden, barely readable nonsense was my creation.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


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



They had a productive society before Israel. They didn't get foreign aid before.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Indeed, There has never been a "Palestinian" society. 

And another _Indeed_.


----------



## patrickcaturday (Nov 28, 2013)

> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > patrickcaturday said:
> ...




*And you show me nothing but a mind controled by it's own fantasy ridden phobias, and a complete lack of any sembalance of reality !!!  
Now stop your obviscating and answer some of the questions that I have posed to you, here is an easy one for you , are these the same greenhouses and fertile lands in which Israel cut off the water ?  That did not have anything to do with their failure now did it ?  A simple yes or no will do , after that one go back and read my first post and see if you can deal with that in a rational way instead of whining about it.*


----------



## Lipush (Nov 28, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > I agree. Terrorists should be killed on the spot, not be jailed.
> ...



Do I?

I'd like to see you prove it


----------



## proudveteran06 (Nov 28, 2013)

I agree with the Palestinians. " Negotiations" are a waste of time. No " 67 Borders" or " Right of Return" . Ask any Pro Palestinian responding to the thread what there is to " negotiate" and there will be no response


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

proudveteran06 said:


> I agree with the Palestinians. " Negotiations" are a waste of time. No " 67 Borders" or " Right of Return" . Ask any Pro Palestinian responding to the thread what there is to " negotiate" and there will be no response



Enforce international law. No negotiations needed.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> proudveteran06 said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with the Palestinians. " Negotiations" are a waste of time. No " 67 Borders" or " Right of Return" . Ask any Pro Palestinian responding to the thread what there is to " negotiate" and there will be no response
> ...



Wonderful.  Kick the terrorists Fakestinians out of the Jewish State of Israel.  That is enforcing international law.  Remember San Remo.  Actually I don't think you would, as you will conveniently forget it as you do with a lot of facts.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > proudveteran06 said:
> ...



I remember San Remo. Neither Israel nor Jewish state were mentioned.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Damn, you have a short memory, we only went through this last week.  Palestine was designated as a Jewish State signed by countries who were members of the League of Nations.  Please, try and absorb facts rather than let them through your brain and into the ether.  You really need to concentrate more if you are interested in the subject.


----------



## proudveteran06 (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> proudveteran06 said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with the Palestinians. " Negotiations" are a waste of time. No " 67 Borders" or " Right of Return" . Ask any Pro Palestinian responding to the thread what there is to " negotiate" and there will be no response
> ...



That wasn't my question. Why are they " negotiating" and what is there to " negotiate" about?  Regarding " International Law" it doesn't exist. If " International Law" existed and was respected there wouldn't have been the Wars that the Arabs initiated; In this case the 67 War.  Israel is never going to give up their Holy Sites, or allow " Right of Return"  Even the Arab League has recognized it


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Link?


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

patrickcaturday said:


> > Hollie said:
> >
> >
> > > Yep. The _Eternal Victim Mentality_ AKA _Palestinian Mentality_ seems to be a communicable disease.
> ...



Oh, the melodrama. 

I'll leave it to you to make excuses for "Pal"-Arab incompetence. The greenhouses I referred to are the ones vandalized and looted by "Pal" degenerates.


----------



## proudveteran06 (Nov 28, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Caroline, What do you care what the old man " thinks"? He's a Palestinian; Just let him rot in his own Racist Bigoted Thoughts


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 28, 2013)

​


P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



*It's fine.  I keep the link handy as people continually bring up doubts, 
in the ridiculous way that someone who does not want to believe facts usually does.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubDhnM0MUmY]Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube[/ame]

San Remo's Mandate: Israel's 'Magna Carta' - Inside Israel - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com​*


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 28, 2013)

If the Palestinians do not wish to talk, then Israel is clear to proceed as planned with Expelling them.

No point in keeping such a dangerous and hostile population in your midst when (1) they aren't getting their old land back and (2) they have someplace else to go, right across the Jordanian border.

Once the Moving Day trauma is behind them and once they're re-established elsewhere, the Palestinians will be far happier in Jordan than in the West Bank and Gaza.

The Israelis will be happier too, as will the rest of the non-Muslim world.

Win-Win.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


> patrickcaturday said:
> 
> 
> > *And you show me nothing but a mind controled by it's own fantasy ridden phobias, and a complete lack of any sembalance of reality !!!
> ...



Do you mean these?

Israel shuts off water, dries Gaza greenhouses


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> ​
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Are you posting the misinterpretation of that clown again?

That does not answer the question. Where does San Remo mention Israel or Jewish state?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > ​
> ...



It mentioned Palestine is for the Jewish people and the surrounding countries for the arabs.  It is in the San Remo Mandate.  Also in the video.  I wouldn't call Dore Gold a clown.  A clown he is not.  How about coming over to the other side.  Go on, it will be a weight off your mind when you do.  You know we are right and you are simply wrong and very very confused.


----------



## Jos (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


> The _Eternal Victim Mentality_


I think you might want to add the © to the Eternal Victim Mentality so as not to fall foul of the jews who registered it first®


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 28, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Where does it say that Palestine was exclusively for the Jews?

Link?


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 28, 2013)

Jos said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > The &#8220;_Eternal Victim Mentality_&#8221;
> ...


True.

But the Jews sold the franchise to the Palestinians in 1948.

Who are not doing too well with it, by all reports.

Looks like the Jews unloaded it just in time, eh?

Just goes to show ya... never buy a used stereotype...


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



*
Howard Grief: Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People
​*


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > patrickcaturday said:
> ...



Indeed. Why would Israel be responsible for maintenance and costs of supplying water to infrastructure they longer own?

Why don't you volunteer for those tasks.


----------



## proudveteran06 (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


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



Because he's a Palestinian


----------



## patrickcaturday (Nov 28, 2013)

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




*Indeed I am not asking the Israelis to be responcible.  What I am asking is that YOU be responcible for your posting.  You posted that it was the fault of the Palestinians that the greenhouses were made valueless when we know that it truely was the result of Israeli actions !!!*


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

patrickcaturday said:


> > Hollie said:
> >
> >
> > > Indeed. Why would Israel be responsible for maintenance and costs of supplying water to infrastructure they longer own?
> ...



Well, you may know that the vandalizing and destruction of the Gaza greenhouses was the result of Israeli actions but you know only falsehoods and misinformation.

Here's your homework assignment. Do a web search with the term: palestinians destroy Gaza greenhouses.

I'll expect a _spell checked_ report.

Off you go. Scoot!


----------



## Hossfly (Nov 28, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Peace talks are  joke. We release prisoners and get nothing in return
> ...


Those prisoners murdered and terrorized innocent civilians in most cases. You expect Israelis to hit the reset button?


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Another one suffering from _Palestinian Mentality_.
> 
> Not to worry, sweety. The UN welfare checks will continue to drench the Arab beggars and squatters with those Infidel checks.


And you'll continue to show the world what's wrong with Israeli's.


----------



## patrickcaturday (Nov 28, 2013)

> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > patrickcaturday said:
> ...




*Well seeing as how you steadfastly refuse to deal with any of the questions and issues that I bring up, I will return the favor.  Also it is pretty arrogant of you to talk to people the way you do but that is something I have noticed about the Zionist Culture not only are they addicted to whining but they are some of the most arrogant people I have ever met.*


----------



## toastman (Nov 28, 2013)

patrickcaturday said:


> > Hollie said:
> >
> >
> > > Well, you may know that the vandalizing and destruction of the Gaza greenhouses was the result of Israeli actions but you know only falsehoods and misinformation.
> ...



That's funny, because I fell the EXACT same way about pro - Palestinians.


----------



## dreolin (Nov 28, 2013)

Lipush said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



Weren't you just complaining in another thread about vigilante justice.

Here we go...

"Do you support 'justice' served by an angry mob?
What is the century you live in?"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8216606-post3.html

Perhaps I am confused, but it sounds like you endorse racism and apartheid to me?


----------



## toastman (Nov 28, 2013)

dreolin said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Yes, you are definitely confused.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 28, 2013)

patrickcaturday said:


> > Hollie said:
> >
> >
> > > Well, you may know that the vandalizing and destruction of the Gaza greenhouses was the result of Israeli actions but you know only falsehoods and misinformation.
> ...



I thought the above might be your response. Your bluster and chest-heaving was suddenly muted when you were confronted with information that contradicted your false claims. 

"Zionist culture"? I hold no religious belief so your silly "Zionist culture" comment is a waste of time.

So far, you've managed to get nothing at all right.


----------



## patrickcaturday (Nov 28, 2013)

Hollie said:


> patrickcaturday said:
> 
> 
> > > *Well seeing as how you steadfastly refuse to deal with any of the questions and issues that I bring up, I will return the favor.  Also it is pretty arrogant of you to talk to people the way you do but that is something I have noticed about the Zionist Culture not only are they addisted to whining but they are some of the most arrogant people I have ever met.*
> ...




*No you are the one who is wrong,  Not only do you refuse to answer the issues that I have raised but you also refuse to acknowledge Israel's Culpability in this matter.
Also a person who claims to have all of the answer should realize that Zionism is not a religious culture but a political culture.  Maybe you are the one who needs to check your facts !!!*


----------



## Lipush (Nov 29, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



Yes, he does.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Posting a link to the same liar lover and over does not answer the question.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Oh

my

goodness



How can you call Laws passed by the League of Nations lies?  

Incredible  pfftinmore, just incredible.  With every post you make you dig yourself deeper and deeper into poop.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



I asked about that and received no answer.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Are you hitting the sauce?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



http://www.usmessageboard.com/8217912-post33.html


----------



## theliq (Nov 29, 2013)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



I think there are at least 170,000 Christian Palestinians.

The more pressing pertinent QUESTION is,why are You such a  Asshole


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> How can you call Laws passed by the League of Nations lies?


Why do you point to laws, when Israel makes it a practice not to follow any?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > How can you call Laws passed by the League of Nations lies?
> ...



Such as....?


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 29, 2013)

Lipush said:


> I agree. Terrorists should be killed on the spot, not be jailed.


My, that's very German of you!


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Such as....?



UN Resolution 242.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Such as....?
> ...



Israel pleaded with Jordan not to join in the attack against Israel, but Jordan ignored it, attacked Israel and Israel regained the land that was taken illegally by Jordan in 1949, which of course no country recognized Jordan's right to that land.  Israel simply recaptured and took rightful ownership of the land again.  Israel is* fully entitled* to the land and to build homes.


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Israel pleaded with Jordan not to join in the attack against Israel, but Jordan ignored it, attacked Israel and Israel regained the land that was taken illegally by Jordan in 1949, which of course no country recognized Jordan's right to that land.  Israel simply recaptured and took rightful ownership of the land again.  Israel is* fully entitled* to the land and to build homes.


So if it was okay for the Nazis to do it, then it's okay for Israel to do it as well?  If it's okay for Germany to annex Poland, then it's okay for Israel to annex territory it wants as well, as long as they come up with a good reason to invade?  Is that right?

Oh, wait a minute, it was not okay for Germany to do that!  And it's not okay for Israel to do it either.  You cannot hold onto land seized in a war.



> _The right of conquest is the right of a conqueror to territory taken by force of arms. It was traditionally a principle of international law which has in modern times gradually *given way until its proscription after the Second World War when the crime of war of aggression was first codified in the Nuremberg Principles and then finally, in 1974, as a United Nations resolution 3314*.
> 
> The completion of colonial conquest of much of the world (see the Scramble for Africa), the devastation of World War I and World War II, and the alignment of both the United States and the Soviet Union with the principle of self-determination *led to the abandonment of the right of conquest in formal international law. **The 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact, the post-1945 Nuremberg Trials, the UN Charter, and the UN role in decolonization saw the progressive dismantling of this principle.* Simultaneously, the UN Charter's guarantee of the "territorial integrity" of member states effectively froze out claims against prior conquests from this process._


I'm sorry, twisted sister, but what you're claiming is illegal.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Israel pleaded with Jordan not to join in the attack against Israel, but Jordan ignored it, attacked Israel and Israel regained the land that was taken illegally by Jordan in 1949, which of course no country recognized Jordan's right to that land.  Israel simply recaptured and took rightful ownership of the land again.  Israel is* fully entitled* to the land and to build homes.
> ...



Israel was in a *defensive war*.  It is really simple to understand and is the basis for non-compliance with 242.


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Israel was in a *defensive war*.  It is really simple to understand and is the basis for non-compliance with 242.


It doesn't matter.

BTW, the '67 war officially began when Israeli tanks rolled into Egypt.

That's not defense.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 29, 2013)

patrickcaturday said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > patrickcaturday said:
> ...



Why are you whining about your issues not being addressed when your issues have been addressed?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Israel was in a *defensive war*.  It is really simple to understand and is the basis for non-compliance with 242.
> ...



No, it does matter.  

Jordan attacked Israel and Israel drove them back, thereby taking the land that Jordan was not entitled to in the first place and Israel was.  Had Jordan not attacked Israel then Jordan would still be in possession (albeit illegally as it had not right to be there) of the West Bank.

It is so simple to understand, but of course you lot twist it so as to make it look like Israel shouldn't be there, when Israel should.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...





> land that Jordan was not entitled to in the first place



Didn't Jordan occupy that land since 1948?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Yes, Jordan occupied that land *illegally, in a war of aggression*, not defense.  

Land taken in a war of aggression is illegal.

*Land taken in a war of defense is legal*, particularly since it was Jewish land in the first place, according to San Remo.

Understand?


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Yes, Jordan occupied that land *illegally, in a war of aggression*, not defense.
> 
> Land taken in a war of aggression is illegal.
> 
> ...


LOL.......there is normal logic......and then there is Juden logic.   .


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, Jordan occupied that land *illegally, in a war of aggression*, not defense.
> ...



Well, tell me what is illogical if you can because I explained it clearly and truthfully.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 29, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, Jordan occupied that land *illegally, in a war of aggression*, not defense.
> ...



Then again, there is _islamo-logic_.

Moslems are still whining about the lands conquered during the islamo-Crusades which have since been liberated. 

As a convert, you obviously know little of islamo-ideology.  There is a concept called _wagf_ that islamo-supremacists hold.

That concept is what drives ummah'istan thus allowing the "Palestinians" to be used as convenient cannon-fodder in the vilification (and hoped-for destruction) of Israel. 
In Arabic, waqf can literally mean prevention, restraint, or retention. In Islamism, a waqf is any property that has been seized for the benefit of Moslems, in perpetuity, and to please muhammud (swish). It is essentially making land, or other material, muhammud's (swish) property, not to be taken back by anyone. It is an important part of shariah law, and has several purposes. In the context of "Palestine", we are concerned with its ramifications in connection with land.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



There was a war between Palestine and Jordan? How did Palestine get to be occupied by Jordan, or Egypt for that matter?


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, Jordan occupied that land *illegally, in a war of aggression*, not defense.
> ...



LOL everyone was contributing to the debate, and then Sunni Troll comes and trolls the thread, as usual. What a waste of space you are, little Muslim Shill


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



The day after Israel was declared a State in 1948 Israel was attacked from all sides.  Jordan illegally occupied what is known as the West Bank, and kicked every Jew out of the area, and destroyed the synagogues and graveyards, and Jewish institutions.  Jordan held on to that territory until it attacked Israel again in 1967, but Israel was miraculously triumphant and pushed the Jordanian army back.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



'Palestine' was not occupied by Jordan.  The West Bank was

'Palestine' was not occupied by Egypt, Gaza was.

If you don't know these facts, you have no business debating here


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Israel was in a *defensive war*.  It is really simple to understand and is the basis for non-compliance with 242.
> ...



 

Please, stop making me laugh !!!!!


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



And not all of Gaza was occupied by Egypt. Some was occupied by Israel. You are being picayune.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Don't they just say the most hilarious things when backed into a corner?


----------



## proudveteran06 (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



The 67. War began when Jordan and Egypt started to surround Israel , build up their military along the " borders" we hear so much about , Nasser telling the world he was going to destroy Israel, but more importantly send the UN away . Ask the Palestinian; Why was it done especially the latter?   There will be no response


----------



## Hollie (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



A portion of Gaza was partitioned by Israel as the result of winning a war started by arab/moslem aggressors. It was an effective buffer to prevent further wars of conquest by hostile Arabs.

Arabs/moslems have a history of launching wars that leave them only with humiliating losses.

Your lack of knowledge regarding these issues leaves you poorly prepared to post in a public discussion board.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



It's as though they line up like ducks in an arcade shootem' up game.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Yeah, and you probably think that the Arabs lost the 1948 war.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


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


The Arab/moslem initiated war in 1948 was intended to remove any vestige of the Jewish State of Israel. That failed.


Other than that, Arabs/moslem gave some 1/2 million "Palestinian" arabs the Bums's Rush out of the way as part of their spectacular failure to "drive the Jooooos into the sea".


If you define spectacular failure as a victory, then yes, Arabs/moslems "won" a spectacular failure. Is the preceding an utter contradiction? Yes. 

Only in your mind does the absurd make sense.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

Hollie said:


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



And Israel wanted to take all of Palestine and failed.

None of them lost any land.

What is your point.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


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



What are you laughing at?? They did lose the war. BIG TIME !!

1948 Arab?Israeli War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*Result 	Israeli victory; Palestinian Arab defeat; Arab League strategic failure*

We've been through this MANY times, and each time I win the argument
So if you want to go through t again, no problem, bring it on


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


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



Israel came out of the 1948 war with no land. Israel agreed to that when it signed the armistice agreements.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



No land ?? LOL 

How can a country have no land. Not only did they win the war, but they captured more territory 

That's another issue , we're talking about the war. I'm just proved your earlier post wrong by providing a link. You provided nothing


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



You can't just look at the say so, you have to look at the facts.



> *Article V
> *
> 1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.
> 
> The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949



Israel signed the agreement stating that the international border was between Lebanon and Palestine. Before the ink was dry, Israel was saying that was its border.

That is not true.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Are you so totally befuddled. that you completely lose track of what you write from post to post?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



No.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


I still see nothing that says Israel Had no land. You made that up. As a matter of fact you've never backed that up because it makes no sense to begin with. By the way I backed up all of my claims with links you didn't


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...





> the international border was between Lebanon and Palestine.



I know it is complicated but let me walk you through it. If the border is between Lebanon and Palestine then Lebanon would be on one side and Palestine would be on the other. Are you still with me?

Israel is saying that it is a Lebanon and Israel border. That is not what the agreement it signed says.

Here, this one is simpler.



> *Article V*
> 
> (d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958)* to the southernmost tip of Palestine,* the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by existing military positions as surveyed in March 1949 by United Nations observers, and shall run from north to south as delineated on map 1 in annex I to this Agreement.
> 
> The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949



Israel says that is Israel, but that does not match the agreement it signed.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



I know it's complicated Tinmore but, you STILL haven't disproved what I said.

What a waste of time you are. How can an internationally recognized country have no 'land' . The land became theres the moment they declared independence, and what you're saying has NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING to do with what we are discussing.
You are just showing me the Armistice Agreement and using that as YOUR conclusion to say Israel has no land. The wikipedia article says otherwise.
I'll take the article over the word of an anti - Zionist Israel hater ANY day of the week.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

I forgot to mention, you also never backed up your statement that "Israel did not win the 1948 war"

I provided a link, and you provided a song and dance


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

And yes, I know, I stole the term 'song and dance' from you.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> I forgot to mention, you also never backed up your statement that "Israel did not win the 1948 war"
> 
> I provided a link, and you provided a song and dance





> Preamble
> 
> The Parties to the present Agreement, responding to the Security Council resolution of 16 November 1948 calling upon them, as a further provisional measure under Article 40 of the Charter of the United Nations and in order to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, to negotiate an Armistice; having decided to enter into negotiations under United Nations Chairmanship concerning the implementation of the Security Council resolutions of 4 and 16 November 1948; (2) and having appointed representatives empowered to negotiate and conclude an Armistice Agreement;
> 
> The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949



An armistice was called by UN Security Council resolution. An armistice has no winners or losers.

In addition:

The borders for Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Palestine remained unchanged from before the war. None of them lost any land.

So, what did Israel win. When the war ended Israel *occupied* 78% of Palestine.


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> "...An armistice has no winners or losers..."


When the goal of Side A (Israel) is merely to survive...

When the goal of Side B (Egypt, et al) is to destroy Side A...

And when, after fighting, an Armistice is proposed and agreed upon by both sides...

In which Side A (Israel) achieves its goal (survival)...

In which Side B (Egypt et al) fails to achieve its goal (destruction of Side A)...

Then...

Side A (Israel) is the Winner, and...

Side B (Egypt, et al) is the Loser...

For all practical purposes and by any sane and objective gauge...

In the Real World...

Technicalities and labeling notwithstanding...


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > I forgot to mention, you also never backed up your statement that "Israel did not win the 1948 war"
> ...



How did Israel occupy it's own country ??? That makes no sense. Got a link that says ISrael occupied 78% of Palestine ? 

Ya, that's what I thought, just more Arab lies


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > I forgot to mention, you also never backed up your statement that "Israel did not win the 1948 war"
> ...



When you say Palestine, are you talkingt about the Arab STATE PAlestine, during the time period we are discussing ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Not a relevant question.



> Article 2
> 
> Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
> 
> ...


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Once again, you post something that is completely irrelevant to what we are discussing. 

You have yet to back up any of the following claims:

1)Israel did not win the 1948 Arab - Israeli War
2) Israel has no land
3)Israel occupied 78% of Palestine after the war (I don't even know where to begin with that one)


Have you ever read an online article about the 1948 war?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



I have. It does not refute anything that I have posted.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



No you havent .  Stop lying . 

Have you ever read an article or something about the 1948 war ??


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



I have read a lot about the 1948 war.

Why don't you post some quotes from some documents to support your points?


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Please show me the link you are reading about the 1948 war.

And what points of mine are you talking about ?  You haven't even proved yous to begin with, and you know it.


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 29, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Don't they just say the most hilarious things when backed into a corner?


What's even funnier, is I can prove what I say, you can't!



> _The Six-Day War...also known as the June War, 1967 Arab-Israeli War, or Third Arab-Israeli War, was fought between June 5 and 10, 1967, by Israel and the neighboring states of Egypt (known at the time as the United Arab Republic), Jordan, and Syria. *The war began on June 5 with Israel launching surprise bombing raids against Egyptian air-fields*._


Now write that down for future reference.  This about the 3rd time I've had to school you fuckers on this subject and I'm getting tired of repeating myself. 

You need to grow a pair and accept the horror, you started this war.  For once, why don't you break from Zionist tradition and take responsibility for something you did, instead of jumping through hoops to blame others for your actions.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Don't they just say the most hilarious things when backed into a corner?
> ...




You're such a fool, you know that ? You schooled no one . 

Please tell us, what led Israel to pre - emptively striking Egypt , a point you Arab supporters just love to leave out ! 
Did they just wake up one morning and say "Hey, lets go bomb Egypt for no reason"


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

BTW Loinboy, I'm still laughing at what you said: "School you fuckers" hahaha 

I didn't know being wrong was considered schooling someone, but hey, I learn something new from you idiots every day here !


----------



## P F Tinmore (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)




----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> You're such a fool, you know that ? You schooled no one .
> 
> Please tell us, what led Israel to pre - emptively striking Egypt , a point you Arab supporters just love to leave out !
> Did they just wake up one morning and say "Hey, lets go bomb Egypt for no reason"


The Bush Doctrine is illegal.

Israel pulled the trigger first.

Have some balls, snowback and stop blaming others for the things Israel does.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You're such a fool, you know that ? You schooled no one .
> ...



\what Israel does? What's wrong with what Israel did that day in 1967, please tell me ? What wrong with pre - emptively striking your enemies before they hit you?

Also, you didn't answer my question. So I'll ask it again. 
Why did Israel pre - emptively strike Egypt ?


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> \what Israel does? What's wrong with what Israel did that day in 1967, please tell me ? What wrong with pre - emptively striking your enemies before they hit you?
> 
> Also, you didn't answer my question. So I'll ask it again.
> Why did Israel pre - emptively strike Egypt ?


You don't know how wrong it is, to hit someone that hadn't hit you first?

If you'd like to know how wrong it is, put your keyboard down, get up, walk out your front door, go up to the first person you see and punch them right in the mouth.  Then come back and tell us what happened next.  I guarantee, when you return, you will know how wrong that act was.


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > \what Israel does? What's wrong with what Israel did that day in 1967, please tell me ? What wrong with pre - emptively striking your enemies before they hit you?
> ...



What a terrible and weak argument/comparison 

If 3 people (Arab states) mass along your borders with tanks, troops while threatening to eliminate you, do you stand still or attack first ? You know fell well the Arabs were on their way to attacking Israel. 

Thank God Israel had the balls to pre - emptively strike Egypt before they could do any harm 

And you STILL haven't answered my question


----------



## theliq (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Don't be such an IDIOT, Israel have Nuclear Weaponary,and would use it. Such pro Israel IDIOTS like this CRETIN.....thinks everyone is stupidyou fool


----------



## toastman (Nov 29, 2013)

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Nuclear Weapons ? Wtf does that have do with what we're discussing 

And if they would use them, why haven't they yet ?

My goodness, it seems like the amount of idiotic and useless comments from pro - Palis is piling up the last few weeks


----------



## theliq (Nov 29, 2013)

toastman said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Good Toasty.....you have admitted that Israel have Nuclear......lets send in the NC Weapon Inspectors............but Israel scream they don't have them.....We know better but it's interesting dealing with compulsive LIARS,for LAIRS THEY ARE...COMPLETELY


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 29, 2013)

Yes, Toastman, some of these Arab Lovers conveniently omit the fact that the Egyptians, Syrians, Jordanians and Iraqis - backed by a lot of other Arab states - had amassed a quarter of a million men, including large-scale armored formations, air assets, etc., all along Israel's borders, poised to strike within a matter of days.

Israel's "starting it" consisted of brilliant, big-balls airstrikes against Arab air forces and newly-created and manned border-area ground positions before the Arabs could swarm-in and overwhelm the Israelis.

These Arab Lovers want the audience to believe that Israel's "preemptive strike" was against Arab war-assets that were in stand-down mode and parked well within Arab state interior bases and nowhere near the borders of Israel, in atypical fashion, poised to strike.

And they love trying to pitch it that way, for a new generation who haven't read-up on the war  and can't be bothered to look it up on their own and who are gullible enough to believe them.

The Israeli "preemptive" strike of 1967 against Arab war-assets, which kicked off the 1967 Six-Day War, was NOT a 'Bush Doctrine' style preemptive assault against another country whose forces were in a stand-down mode; rather, the Israeli "preemptive" strike of 1967 was against massed Arab military formations that had just been moved along Israel's borders and which were poised to strike Israel within the next several days.

The Israelis merely took some of them out while already and atypically poised to strike Israel, before they could overwhelm the Israelis and slaughter them.

A brilliant strategic and tactical move that led to an overwhelming Israeli victory over long odds, which caused the Jordanians to lose the West Bank and Jerusalem.

Dumb Arabs 'dun' got their asses kicked good and proper, again, by itty-bitty Israel.

Continuing the Arab tradition of being the military laughing-stock of the non-Muslim world.


----------



## Lipush (Nov 30, 2013)

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Yeah, but our Nuclear Weaponary only works on old ugly-bearded Persians.

But you won't tell on us, right?


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 30, 2013)

toastman said:


> What a terrible and weak argument/comparison
> 
> If 3 people (Arab states) mass along your borders with tanks, troops while threatening to eliminate you, do you stand still or attack first ? You know fell well the Arabs were on their way to attacking Israel.
> 
> ...


You can make up any bullshit reason to attack someone else, it still doesn't make it right.

Egypt could line up their entire army along the border and as long as they stay on their side of the line, it's none of Israel's god-damn business what goes on within the territorial borders of a sovereign nation.

Your argument is basically saying that it is okay to punish someone for a crime they didn't commit.  I can tell you're not an American.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > What a terrible and weak argument/comparison
> ...



In a strategic sense, Israel had no choice but to strike, take the initiative and throw Egypt off balance. Honestly, Loinboy, your _jew hatin_ attitudes are why your comments are so laughably inept.

Egypt had no hidden agenda in its massing of troops and armor along the border. This was just the reality of the political landscape in connection with hostile arab Crusaders hated (and still hate) Israel which was (and still is) viewed as an affront to islam. In the diseased moslem psyche, only blood will serve; only dead Israelis will sufficiently unite the moslem world to not only vilify Israel but also further incite hatred and violence, even war, against her. And the prepared scripts from morons such as you continue as planned because it serves your agenda of Joooooo hatreds.


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> "..._Egypt could line up their entire army along the border and as long as they stay on their side of the line, it's none of Israel's god-damn business what goes on within the territorial borders of a sovereign nation_..."


On May 22, less than two weeks beforehand, Egyptian President Nassar had publicly declared that his near-term goal was the destruction of Israel.

You are essentially saying here that it is OK to (1) declare that you will be going to war with your adversary soon to wipe them out, (2) declare a general military mobilization of your country, (3) deploy two-thirds [2/3] of your Army and Air Force snug-up against your adversary's borders, (4) begin coordinating war-plans with your allies (Syria, Iraq, Jordan) on your adversary's other borders and (5) have the delusional expectation of protection of international law until you had actually launched your attack.

You are absolutely correct, legally speaking.

You may also be an idiot, in terms of the practicalities attending to the affairs of nations and men and armies and warfare, and you would never be a good candidate for promotion to the general staff nor strategy board of any nation's armed forces, nor could you be trusted in any position designed to protect your nation on the strategic or macro level.

Which is a damned shame, because I perceive you to be an intelligent person.

If my choices are...

1. obey international law to the extreme letter, while ignoring public declarations by the enemy and general mobilzations and deployments that are going to overwhelm my people unless some intervention is successfully executed, or...

2. preemptively striking at these massed and forward-deployed ground positions and air forces, to whittle down the enemy and attain air superiority, before they strike in the next couple of days...

...or, put another way, if my choices are...

1. obey international law to the extreme letter...

...or...

2. ensure the survival of my people...

Then I choose the survival of my people every time, and sadly find myself obliged to say to the world at-large: "_Fuck International Law, in this instance. Sue me, assholes_."

At least my people will still be alive and intact at the end of the sequence.

It was down to just such a visceral choice in the final run-up to the 1967 Six Day War.

The Israelis made the correct choice.

And, as luck or The Fates or God Almighty or Chance or whatever would have it, that also set the stage for the Israelis to kick some major-league Arab ass, and bitch-slap the lot of 'em.

If, as a leader of a government - any government, in any part of the world - if as a leader, you ever chose (1) - your own people would slit your throat, before they surrendered to or died at the hands of the enemy that was swamping them under.

And rightfully so, because you would have been a traitor to your people, for no better reason than because you wanted to obey International Law to the letter, at the expense of their survival; reasonably confident that your actions would produce such a tragic outcome.

In actuality, I think you're intelligent enough and have enough common sense that you would have come-around to the necessity of (1) yourself... it's just that you're obliged to hold otherwise here in these public postings, in pursuit of your pro-Palestinian / pro-Arab propaganda agenda.

On the other hand, if, in the real world, you really and truly would choose (1), then, unfortunately, you may very well be an idiot after all, in terms of functioning with the Real World, in a strategic or tactical military sense, and may be confidently ignored in that context.

It is my hope - for your sake - that, in the Real World, you are not actually crippled thus.


----------



## toastman (Nov 30, 2013)

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...



What are you blabbing about now ?? We're talking about the 6 day war 

And Israel doesn't admit they don't have them. Where's your link for that < LIAR ?


----------



## toastman (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > What a terrible and weak argument/comparison
> ...



Another terrible, childish idiotic comparison. Not even CLOSE to the same thing. 

You are omitting the fact the Egypt had already declared war by massing their troops and tanks at the border, while threatening to destroy Israel . And yes, that IS Israels business, since the threats were directed at them.

Lesson learned: Don't mass your military by Israels borders or make threats of annihilation


----------



## toastman (Nov 30, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Yes, Toastman, some of these Arab Lovers conveniently omit the fact that the Egyptians, Syrians, Jordanians and Iraqis - backed by a lot of other Arab states - had amassed a quarter of a million men, including large-scale armored formations, air assets, etc., all along Israel's borders, poised to strike within a matter of days.
> 
> Israel's "starting it" consisted of brilliant, big-balls airstrikes against Arab air forces and newly-created and manned border-area ground positions before the Arabs could swarm-in and overwhelm the Israelis.
> 
> ...



Well said Kondor . 

Of course , since the Arabs were humiliated by losing to a tiny country, they and their supporters, like Billy Boy , claim that Israel was the aggressor 
What can I say, pro - Palestinians just LOVE to alter history


----------



## Hollie (Nov 30, 2013)

toastman said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Honestly though, I cant help but chuckle at the thought of that last instant in time for some wannabe jihadi whose last image is a smiley face painted on the business end of a Hellfire Missile.


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 30, 2013)

toastman said:


> Another terrible, childish idiotic comparison. Not even CLOSE to the same thing.
> 
> You are omitting the fact the Egypt had already declared war by massing their troops and tanks at the border, while threatening to destroy Israel . And yes, that IS Israels business, since the threats were directed at them.
> 
> Lesson learned: Don't mass your military by Israels borders or make threats of annihilation


Funny how that door doesn't swing both ways when we talk about Israeli threats and actions by their military against the Palestinian's or it's neighbors.

So you're saying it's okay for Iran to bomb Israel  because they lobbied Congress to take military action against Tehran?


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Another terrible, childish idiotic comparison. Not even CLOSE to the same thing.
> ...


Only if you've got the balls and the muscle to do it.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Nov 30, 2013)

Israel started the 1967 war by attacking Egypt, in an act of aggression, a war crime under international law.

War criminals  will be war criminals!


----------



## Hollie (Nov 30, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Israel started the 1967 war by attacking Egypt, in an act of aggression, a war crime under international law.
> 
> War criminals  will be war criminals!



How odd that you don't apply those same standards to your islamist terrorist heroes in Gaza. 

Your sweaty, feverish tantrums are comedy gold.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Nov 30, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Israel started the 1967 war by attacking Egypt, in an act of aggression, a war crime under international law.
> 
> 
> War criminals  will be war criminals!



If my country was about to be attacked on all sides, I would certainly do a strike to weaken my enemy because if I waited to be attacked before I retaliated then my strength to respond would be weakened.  Common sense isn't it.


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 30, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Israel started the 1967 war by attacking Egypt, in an act of aggression, a war crime under international law. War criminals  will be war criminals!


Perhaps the Arabs (Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq) should not have declared their intention to destroy Israel and then declared general mobilizations and then massed a quarter-million men and armored formations and air-fleets right alongside Israeli borders in the few days prior to the initial Israeli airstrikes?






Incompetent fools.


----------



## toastman (Nov 30, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > Israel started the 1967 war by attacking Egypt, in an act of aggression, a war crime under international law. War criminals  will be war criminals!
> ...



Sherri's opinion doesn't count. According to her, Israel is not allowed to attack, even when under threat, but it's perfectly legal for Palestinian terrorists to attack 
The nutcase known as Sheri MunnerNazi has no credibility, however I do laugh at the fact that she thinks she does


----------



## toastman (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Another terrible, childish idiotic comparison. Not even CLOSE to the same thing.
> ...



Another deflection. But I'll bite anyhow

I'll tell you what, when Israel masses it's troops along Iran's border while threatening to destroy the country, then we'll talk.


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 30, 2013)

toastman said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


----------



## Alfalfa (Nov 30, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > Israel started the 1967 war by attacking Egypt, in an act of aggression, a war crime under international law.
> ...



Well, that's what the japanese did at pearl...


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 30, 2013)

Alfalfa said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > SherriMunnerlyn said:
> ...


The Japanese were about to be attacked on all sides?

I guess the US Pacific Fleet didn't get the memo, and was still in port, thousands of miles from Japan.


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 30, 2013)

Hollie said:


> In a strategic sense, Israel had no choice but to strike,


They had a choice.  Obey the law. 



Hollie said:


> take the initiative and throw Egypt off balance. Honestly, Loinboy, your _jew hatin_ attitudes are why your comments are so laughably inept.


Why would I hate jews?

Can you answer that question, you disgusting piece of shit?


Hollie said:


> Egypt had no hidden agenda in its massing of troops and armor along the border.


That's still not illegal.



Hollie said:


> This was just the reality of the political landscape in connection with hostile arab Crusaders hated (and still hate) Israel which was (and still is) viewed as an affront to islam.


It has nothing to do with religion.  That's just the bullshit excuse you push to hide the fact that all the hostility has to do with Israeli aggression and illegal acts of colonialism.  They hate Israeli bombs, not Judaism.




Hollie said:


> In the diseased moslem psyche, only blood will serve; only dead Israelis will sufficiently unite the moslem world to not only vilify Israel but also further incite hatred and violence, even war, against her. And the prepared scripts from morons such as you continue as planned because it serves your agenda of Joooooo hatreds.


All ask you again, why would I hate jews?  

I find it pretty retarded you making a claim like that, but not being able to say why?

What will end this conflict, is to get rid of the hatred in pieces of shit like you.  Your hatred is no different than the nazsi hatred of the jews.  It's the same hate.  And both of you can go fuck yourselves!


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 30, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > "..._Egypt could line up their entire army along the border and as long as they stay on their side of the line, it's none of Israel's god-damn business what goes on within the territorial borders of a sovereign nation_..."
> ...


What pissed Nassar off?

He didn't wake up one day and say to himself, _*"I hate Israel!"*_

Find what got him angry and you will find Israeli war planes had something to with it.


----------



## Billo_Really (Nov 30, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Only if you've got the balls and the muscle to do it.


Which is something you don't have!


----------



## Hollie (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > In a strategic sense, Israel had no choice but to strike,
> ...


It has everything to do with religion.




> That's just the bullshit excuse you push to hide the fact that all the hostility has to do with Israeli aggression and illegal acts of colonialism.  They hate Israeli bombs, not Judaism.


You live under a rock, right?




Hollie said:


> In the diseased moslem psyche, only blood will serve; only dead Israelis will sufficiently unite the moslem world to not only vilify Israel but also further incite hatred and violence, even war, against her. And the prepared scripts from morons such as you continue as planned because it serves your agenda of Joooooo hatreds.





> All ask you again, why would I hate jews?


Why do you hate Jews?  



> I find it pretty retarded you making a claim like that, but not being able to say why?


I find the majority of your comments stupendpusly stupid.



> What will end this conflict, is to get rid of the hatred in pieces of shit like you.  Your hatred is no different than the nazsi hatred of the jews.  It's the same hate.  And both of you can go fuck yourselves!


Really. The entirety of the hatreds that drive islamist terrorism are my fault? 

That makes no sense. But coming from you, expected.


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> "..._What pissed Nassar off? He didn't wake up one day and say to himself, "I hate Israel!" . Find what got him angry and you will find Israeli war planes had something to with it._"


Why don't you dazzle all of us with your presentation and analysis of such matters, instead?


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Only if you've got the balls and the muscle to do it.
> ...


That's OK... the Arabs cut yours off quite some time ago... they like their 'special' boys docile.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 30, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



You really are an idiot. What pissed off Nassar was the possibility of losing islamo street cred. He didnt dare appear weak in terms of his Islamic inspired virulent hatred of Jooooos because that would have allowed the rats to start gnawing at his feet. He had to save face to keep the hellhole of Arabism under control.


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 30, 2013)

Hollie said:


> You really are an idiot. What &#8220;pissed off Nassar&#8221; was the possibility of losing islamo street cred. He didn&#8217;t dare appear weak in terms of his Islamic inspired virulent hatred of Jooooos because that would have allowed the rats to start gnawing at his feet. He had to save face to keep the hellhole of Arabism under control.


Indeed.

Nassar got suckered into mobilizing and deploying because of bogus intelligence reports fed to him by the Soviets, which wrongly stated that the Israelis were preparing to attack Syria, after a war-of-words between the Israelis and Syrians about letting Palestinian terrorists sneak across the border.

Nassar mobilized, deprived the Israelis of the use of a major commercial waterway, and then deployed into the Sinai in defiance of UN Peacekeepers, some weeks before the war began, and, once deployed, he could not de-mobilize without looking like a Chickenshit to the rest of Islam, so, he kept nudging closer and closer to the Israeli border with various shifts and re-deployments, and coordinated such moves with the Syrians, until the Israelis decided it was time to strike, to end the deployment shell-game and to avert a disaster.

With those bloodthirsty types, once you draw your sword, you can't sheath it again until it's drawn blood... metaphorically speaking... and Nassar's idiocy trapped him and his own country and several others into an ill-advised war, and, as it turned-out, a whole can of Whoop-Ass, courtesy of the IDF.

A major milestone in the long list of modern-day military humiliations of the Arab world, and a long-lasting (40+ years) round of raucous and contemptuous laughter at their military incompetency by much of the rest of the non-Muslim world.


----------



## toastman (Nov 30, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Distorting history, it's what pro - Palestinians do best !


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 1, 2013)

Hollie said:


> You really are an idiot. What &#8220;pissed off Nassar&#8221; was the possibility of losing islamo street cred. He didn&#8217;t dare appear weak in terms of his Islamic inspired virulent hatred of Jooooos because that would have allowed the rats to start gnawing at his feet. He had to save face to keep the hellhole of Arabism under control.


I will agree with you on Nassar.  He was a stupid general with a big ego. He made a lot of mistakes and didn't want his people to know about it.

But that's not the whole story.  He did have reason to be pissed off at Israel.



> _*During 1965-7, Israel's armed forces staged numerous provocations along the Israeli-Syrian border area. *The pattern was of action and reaction. Israeli armoured tractors, often guarded by police, would start to plow in a disputed area of the DMZ. From its high ground positions, Syria would fire at those advancing, and, adopting a new policy, retaliated for Israeli fire at Syrian military positions by firing on civilian settlements in the Hula Valley. Israel would retaliate with raids on Syrian positions, including the use of air power. *U.N. officials blamed both Israel and Syria for destabilizing the borders*._


Let's just say both sides were provoking each other.

But on the subject of hating Israel, when reading your posts, I ask myself, _"How can anyone not hate Israel?"  _I have come to the conclusion, after seeing you spew hate 24/7, that you are someone who is truly worth hating.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 1, 2013)

Israels act of aggression against Egypt was a war crime.

Egypts' s alleged acts of provocation were not. 

As always, we see Zionists in Palestine choosing the war criminal path to take, just like the Nazis they emulate.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 1, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You really are an idiot. What pissed off Nassar was the possibility of losing islamo street cred. He didnt dare appear weak in terms of his Islamic inspired virulent hatred of Jooooos because that would have allowed the rats to start gnawing at his feet. He had to save face to keep the hellhole of Arabism under control.
> ...



I see that you have modified and corrected your one-sided position of entitlement maintaining the Arabs/moslems as non aggressors when of course, they were.

You just hate being corrected.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 1, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Israels act of aggression against Egypt was a war crime.
> 
> Egypts' s alleged acts of provocation were not.
> 
> As always, we see Zionists in Palestine choosing the war criminal path to take, just like the Nazis they emulate.



You have already been shown that your comments are false and without merit.

Even by your standards of posting false and just plain ignorant comments, that was among your most insulting efforts - insulting to thinking humans who you have divorced yourself from.

Being at the top of the insulting / ignorant list, well, an achievement of some merit, I suppose.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 1, 2013)

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict

By*Jews for Justice in the Middle East

Published in Berkeley, CA, 2001

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict


Some uncomfortable facts for Zionists to confront.

And name calling and personal insults change none of these facts.

"Under the UN Charter there can lawfully be no territorial gains from war, even by a state acting in self-defense. The response of other states to Israel&#8217;s occupation shows a virtually unanimous opinion that even if Israel&#8217;s action was defensive, its retention of the West Bank and Gaza Strip was not...The [UN] General Assembly characterized Israel&#8217;s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as a denial of self determination and hence a &#8216;serious and increasing threat to international peace and security.&#8217; &#8220;*John Quigley, &#8220;Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice.&#8221;


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 1, 2013)

More uncomfortable facts for Zionists to confront.

And name calling and personal insults change none of these facts, either.

The 1967 war was started by Israel and was not defensive.

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict

By*Jews for Justice in the Middle East

Published in Berkeley, CA, 2001

"Jews for Justice has made this excellent resource available to people around the world..."

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict

"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was &#8216;no threat of destruction&#8217; but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could &#8216;exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.&#8217;...Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: &#8216;In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.&#8217;&#8220;*Noam Chomsky, &#8220;The Fateful Triangle.&#8221;"


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

Hollie said:


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


Yeah, I will give Brillo-Boy credit for an occasional flash-burst of honesty.

He is not yet quite so far 'gone' as two or three of his same-side colleagues that come to mind.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 1, 2013)

Hollie said:


> That's both naïve and stupid in view of the circumstances.


No it's not.  That's what the law is for.  It's set up to settle disputes peacefully.  Because no one wants a repeat of WWII.  Except you guys.



Hollie said:


> Oh my. Aren't you the internet tough guy.


Oh, shut-up!



Hollie said:


> It has everything to do with religion.


It has nothing to do with religion.

It has everything to do with real estate.



Hollie said:


> You live under a rock, right?


No, they do, after you bombed their building into rubble.



Hollie said:


> Why do you hate Jews?


Why do you say things for no reason?




Hollie said:


> I find the majority of your comments stupendpusly stupid.


Because that's the level of understanding your grey matter will take you.

Anything above stupid, you start having major comprehension issues.



Hollie said:


> Really. The entirety of the hatreds that drive islamist terrorism are my fault?


See what I mean?  I never said entirety.  Your hatred, drives their hatred.  The difference being, your hatred is a matter of choice.  Their hatred is a matter of survival.




Hollie said:


> That makes no sense. But coming from you, expected.


It seems there isn't a single post of mine you intend to comment on, without  tweaking what I said in order to fit your response.  Like slipping in that "entirety" comment, when I never said such a thing.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 1, 2013)

Hollie said:


> I see that you have modified and corrected your one-sided position of entitlement maintaining the Arabs/moslems as non aggressors when of course, they were.


There you go again, trying to tweak what I said.  I never said the arabs were "non-aggressors". But I do understand why you felt the need to slip it in there, so your response would have a little more punch to it.

And my position isn't one-sided. The door swings both ways in my world.  



Hollie said:


> You just hate being corrected.


I don't hate being corrected.  And I wouldn't be patting yourself on the back just yet, because you didn't correct me.  I didn't disagree with your comments on Nassar, I stated there was more to it than that.  Afterwards, I did a little more research to find out for myself and found your comments on him to be accurate.

I have no problem being corrected or admitting when I'm wrong.  You, on the other hand, cannot look at any issue, without first turning on your "Hater-vision".  You've hated so much, for so long, if you ever stopped hating, you'd get lonely.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> More uncomfortable facts for Zionists to confront.
> 
> And name calling and personal insults change none of these facts, either.
> 
> ...


People who participated in such a preemptive attack, militarily or politically or as informed close-in observers, or political opponents of the party directing the war, sometimes rethink their positions, years after the event, with the luxury of time and distance and in the midst of the very safety which they or their political adversaries helped to create.

That does not render their pronouncements (_as carried on pro-Palestinian / anti-Israeli websites_ ) to be accurate or in-context, in whole or even in part; especially when pronouncements such as the Begin statement were actually being used to conjure-up a Precedent for another  preemptive strike against Lebanon in 1980; some 13 years later; spinning the idea to the Knesset as '_See, we have launched a preemptive strike in the past_'; using the idea of a prior preemption as the precedent-basis for executing another.

For every latter-day revisionist statement you can find which pompously declares that Israel was not justified in preemptively striking at the Arab forces massing along its borders and for striking at the air-assets rearward-deployed in support of those forward deployments...

There are scores of citations that can be found, on the part of non-stakeholder country-citizens and journalists no less, and many of them even contemporary, which will say otherwise.

*One such excerpt may be found in the June 5, 1967 BBC World News article on the opening day of the Six Day War...
*
========================================

*Israel launches attack on Egypt*

_June 5, 1967 - BBC World News_

Israeli forces have launched a pre-emptive attack on Egypt and destroyed nearly 400 Egypt-based military aircraft.

Fighting broke out on the Israel-Egypt border but then quickly spread to involve other neighbouring Arab states with ground and air troops becoming embroiled in battle.

Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol said in a statement that the Egyptian Air Force had taken a great beating and Jordanian and Syrian air forces had been largely destroyed.

*The attack follows a build-up of Arab military forces along the Israeli border.

The Arab states had been preparing to go to war against Israel with Egypt, Jordan and Syria being aided by Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Algeria.

On 27 May the President of Egypt, Abdel Nasser, declared: "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."*

Egypt signed a pact with Jordan at the end of May declaring an attack on one was an attack on both. This was seen by Israel as a clear sign of preparation for all-out war.

...

Israel took decisive action today claiming the element of surprise was the only way it could stand any chance of defending itself against the increasing threat from neighbouring states.

...

So far the US state department has announced, "Our position is neutral in thought, word and deed." This follows its recent stance declaring Israel would not be alone unless it decided to go it alone.

*The path for war was cleared on 16 May when President Nasser ordered the withdrawal of the United Nations Emergency Forces from the Egyptian-Israeli border.
*
BBC ON THIS DAY | 5 | 1967: Israel launches attack on Egypt

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

*...or a related article in the highly respected and credible Encyclopedia Brittanica:*

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

*Six Day War*

Six-Day War, also called June War or Third Arab-Israeli War, brief war that took place June 5&#8211;10, 1967, and was the third of the Arab-Israeli wars. Israel&#8217;s decisive victory included the capture of the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, West Bank, Old City of Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights; the status of these territories subsequently became a major point of contention in the Arab-Israeli conflict.

*Prior to the start of the war, attacks conducted against Israel by fledgling Palestinian guerrilla groups based in Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan had increased, leading to costly Israeli reprisals.* In November 1966 an Israeli strike on the village of Al-Sam&#363;&#703; in the Jordanian West Bank left 18 dead and 54 wounded, and, during an air battle with Syria in April 1967, the Israeli Air Force shot down six Syrian MiG fighter jets. In addition, *Soviet intelligence reports in May indicated that Israel was planning a punitive military campaign against Syria, and, although inaccurate*, the information further heightened tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbours.

*Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser had previously come under sharp criticism for his failure to aid Syria and Jordan against Israel; he had also been accused of hiding behind the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF)* stationed at Egypt&#8217;s border with Israel in the Sinai. Now, however, he moved to unambiguously demonstrate support for Syria: on May 14, 1967, *Nasser mobilized Egyptian forces in the Sinai; on May 18 he formally requested the removal of the UNEF stationed there; and on May 22 he closed the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping, thus instituting an effective blockade of the port city of Elat in southern Israel*. On May 30, King &#7716;ussein of Jordan arrived in Cairo to sign a mutual defense pact with Egypt, placing Jordanian forces under Egyptian command; shortly thereafter, Iraq too joined the alliance.

*In response to the apparent mobilization of its Arab neighbours*, early on the morning of June 5, Israel staged a sudden preemptive air assault and destroyed Egypt&#8217;s air force on the ground; later that day, it incapacitated a great deal of the Jordanian and Syrian air power as well. Without cover from the air, the Arab armies were left vulnerable to attack, and, as a result, the Israeli victory on the ground was also overwhelming...

...

Six-Day War (Middle East [1967]) -- Encyclopedia Britannica


========================================

*And on and on and on...*

Hindsight and armchair quarterbacking are marvelous luxuries.

Such luxurious reflections also oftentimes result in Revisionist Thinking that have very little to do with conditions as they existed and as they were perceived at the time they occured; which is why Revisionism is so dangerous to the Truth and so closely scrutinized and so frequently criticized and rejected, regardless of the subject matter at hand.

Most contemporary and non-stakeholder and neutral third-party assessments and logic and common sense tell us that the Arabs were very close to striking at Israel from multiple directions and with the armed forces of several neighboring Muslim-Arab countries; having already committed an act of war by closing an international waterway to the Israelis and imposing a blockade on one of Israel's major ports, and having repudiated the Armistice of 1949 by ejecting the UN Peacekeeping force from the Sinai.

The pronouncements and declared intentions of Muslim-Arab leadership at the time are all that is needed to gauge the intentions of the Arabs, when taken together with the large-scale massing of troops and war-assets along the borders of Israel and Egypt's act of war in blockading an Israeli port and Egypt's repudiation of the 1949 Armistice.

The only pertinent questions here are...

*1. would a reasonable person on-the-scene in 1967 construe that the Arabs were about to attack*, given the massed troop concentrations and declared intentions and recent alliances of Arab leadership?

*2. would a reasonable person on-the-scene in 1967 perceive that the Arabs would probably win * any war in which they were allowed to attack first without crippling their air-assets first?

If the answer to (1) = 'Yes' and if the answer to (2) = 'Yes', then, that begs the third question...

*3. did the Israeli leadership of the time act in good faith* in connection with (1) and (2)?

If the answer to (3) = 'Yes', then, we're done here; the Israeli leadership had all the justification that any sane, rational leadership would ever need, to defend their decision.

All the latter-day Revisionist Thinking in the world and all the self-serving delusional pro-Palestinian progandizing in the world notwithstanding; meaning exactly diddly-squat in the ledgers of History and Truth.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 1, 2013)

Nothing changes the fact that preemptive strikes/attacks are not lawful under international law.

It does not matter how badly warmongers keep striving to explain or justify the unlawful attacks, the attacks by Israel on Egypt in 1967 that started the 6 day war remain unlawful attack under international law.

Warmongers will be warmongers and war criminals too!


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 1, 2013)

More Facts about the 1967 war.

Egypt never intended to attack Israel offensively.

"Was the 1967 war defensive? &#8212; continued

&#8220;I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it.&#8221;*Yitzhak Rabin, Israel&#8217;s Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68"

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> _Nothing changes the fact that preemptive strikes/attacks are not lawful under international law. It does not matter how badly warmongers keep striving to explain or justify the unlawful attacks, the attacks by Israel on Egypt in 1967 that started the 6 day war remain unlawful attack under international law. Warmongers will be warmongers!_


Probability is extremely high that had the Israelis not preemptively attacked and neutralized or pruned-back Arab air-assets on June 5, 1967, Israel would have fallen in June 1967, and not exist today.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 1, 2013)

Listen to the truth from a man whose father was a General in that war.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 1, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> For every latter-day revisionist statement you can find which pompously declares that Israel was not justified in preemptively striking at the Arab forces...


It actually goes way beyond "justified", it was illegal.

There are only two ways you can legally attack another nation.  And that is codified in Article 51 of the UN Charter.  Since Israel is a member state, they are duty bound to honor that Charter.

Why join an organization, if you have no intention of following their rules?

But all that is not news.  The whole world knows you make up your reasons to attack, after the fact.  And they're not very good lies.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > For every latter-day revisionist statement you can find which pompously declares that Israel was not justified in preemptively striking at the Arab forces...
> ...


We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.

*Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.*

If you were the Israeli Prime Minister, and tasked with the defense of Israel...

If Nassar had mobilized, blockaded your port, finalized war-alliances with your other neighbors, declared his intention to destroy you in the next few days, and massed his deployed forces snug up against your borders...

If Nassar had 30 or more modern jet heavy bombers (Tupelov-16s), capable of carrying 20,000 lbs of bombs each and dropping from high altitudes, screened by scores of modern Soviet Mig-21 fighter escorts, on Egyptian airfields, as well as light and medium bombers and fighter escorts in Syria, Jordan and Iraq - all mustered and ready to strike...

Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...

Knowing that by doing so, many of those enemy bombers would succeed in making it past your defenses, and would strike at Tel-Aviv and other civilian cities and towns, triggering hundreds, perhaps many thousands, of Israeli civilian casualties...

Knowing that by doing so, many of your own war-assets (airfields, air-squadrons, armored formations, troop concentrations, etc.) might suffer irreparable damage and cripple your nation's ability to defend itself from attack on all sides?

All in the name of Observance of the Letter of International Law?

Really?


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 1, 2013)

Israel knew Egypt was not going to attack.

The preemptive strikes were all about more land grabs.

That is what my sources prove to be true.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Dec 1, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Israel knew Egypt was not going to attack.
> 
> The preemptive strikes were all about more land grabs.
> 
> That is what my sources prove to be true.



Bullshit lying slime bucket. Your sources? Hamas? Hezbollah? Al Qaeda? Hey Sherri...suck on this...'48, '56, '67 and '73.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 1, 2013)

Six Day War - Historical Documents

Click on link to CIA Analysis and see how all knew before a potential war that Israel would win such a war.

The Myth that Israel's winning this war was some kind of miracle is just that, a myth.

And it certainly appears the US is encouraging Israel to engage in unlawful preemptive strikes, this declassified document.


----------



## Alfalfa (Dec 1, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Almost the entirety of egypt's air force was sitting on the ground cooling it's heels.

Ya, they were going to attack...heheh.


----------



## Alfalfa (Dec 1, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Six Day War - Historical Documents
> 
> Click on link to CIA Analysis and see how all knew before a potential war that Israel would win such a war.
> 
> ...



It's not a myth, it's hasbara.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

Alfalfa said:


> "..._Almost the entirety of egypt's air force was sitting on the ground cooling it's heels_..."


Mustered, fueled, armed, with base-gates closed, and crews on standby, waiting for the Scramble siren; which, judging by the final maneuvers of Arab ground formations, was going to come within a matter of hours or a day or two or three.



> "..._Ya, they were going to attack...heheh._"


Yes, they were. Nassar had already said so. And declared what he was going to do with them. And was conducting final deployments along Israeli's borders just prior to souding that Scramble siren.

Catching air-assets on the ground is how you win, and prevent the other guy from slaughtering your people, once they've already committed acts of war against you and publicly declared their intention to destroy you within the next few days.

Catching air-assets on the ground is an excellent and brilliant thing to do, under such circumstances.

And it paved the way for the Israelis to kick some major-league Arab ass... again.

Heheh...


----------



## Hollie (Dec 1, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Six Day War - Historical Documents
> 
> Click on link to CIA Analysis and see how all knew before a potential war that Israel would win such a war.
> 
> ...



That's so silly. It didn't take a miracle for Israel to win. It took better tactics, better trained troops and a well executed plan.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 1, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.
> 
> *Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.*
> 
> ...


You do not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit.  

And it doesn't matter how much battlefield logic you throw at the problem, if you attack a nation that didn't attack you first, you are guilty of "aggression".  And aggression, considered the highest crime a nation can commit.  Because it's no different than the Nazis going into Poland.  None, whatsoever.

Now if I was Bibi, I'd be more like his son.  I'd put everyone on alert, then sit back and  wouldn't do anything until they actually started shooting, then I'd fuck up their shit!


----------



## toastman (Dec 1, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.
> ...



Why wait for them to attack ? How do you know that it might not be too late?

It was a given that Egypt and Syria were going to attack, so what's the issue exactly ? 
Do you really think that they would mass their troops and tanks, etc.. while threatening Israel, just for fun ??? 
Israel took out their air force BEFORE they could do any damage.. They had secret confidential info about where their airports were BTW.  

It's called military intelligence


----------



## Lipush (Dec 1, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > We can argue the effects of Article 51 and the applicability or integration of both preexisting and subsequent International Law in the matter of preemption or imminent threat some other time.
> ...



Let me see if i get this,

Basically what you say is- I have to wait for someone to shoot me in the head, and only THAN I have the right to defend myself?!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 1, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Let me see if i get this,
> 
> Basically what you say is- I have to wait for someone to shoot me in the head, and only THAN I have the right to defend myself?!


No.  If someone points a gun at you, that's an imminent threat and you have a right to act upon it.

Massing troops at the  border, is not the same as point a gun to your head.

For all you know, they could  be doing war exercises and maneuvers.

I'm sorry, but that's the law!  The law doesn't care if you like it or not, you just have to obey it, or suffer the consequences.  And there will be consequences.  Even if you have to wait until "judgment day", you will pay for all the crimes you have committed on planet earth.  But, so will I.

And I'm thinking, before that day comes, maybe you and I should hook up and...


----------



## toastman (Dec 1, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Let me see if i get this,
> ...





Billo, please read up on the 6 day war, because the phrase I bolded shows that you really never read anything about it. 

Do you really think that Israel woke up one day, saw the Egyptian and Syrian troops by the border and said "Hey, lets go attack them, they MUST be getting ready to attack us first ! "

there was a lot of military intelligence involved. In fact, the pre war preparations is one of the most interesting parts about the war


----------



## WillReadmore (Dec 1, 2013)

Hollie said:


> I hope this thread gets back to the actual topic.
> 
> We can go back and forth on the various wars all the way back to Moses and before if we want to, but that isn't really going to resolve anything at all.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


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


Translation:

My question: "Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...?"

Your answer: "Yes"

My question: "Really?"

Your answer: "Yes"

Did I interpret this correctly?


----------



## theliq (Dec 1, 2013)

Hollie said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > Six Day War - Historical Documents
> ...



By America


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

theliq said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > SherriMunnerlyn said:
> ...


Are you trying to say that the United States won the 1967 War for Israel?


----------



## theliq (Dec 1, 2013)

Lipush said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



As I said "Another IDIOTIC CRETIN" I rest my case.


----------



## theliq (Dec 1, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Of course,you fool.....America had been Arming and giving Israel, Billions of US Dollars since 1948 and before............and TRAINING........your grasp of the 67 War is abismal


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 1, 2013)

WillReadmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I hope this thread gets back to the actual topic.
> ...


----------



## toastman (Dec 1, 2013)

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...



How many American troops fought for Israel ?

How many American fighter Jets were used in the war to bomb enemy targets ?

An how does America arming and giving money to Israel equate to them winning the war for Israel when in fact it was Israeli intelligence that was the main deciding factor in who won the war. And when in fact it was Israeli warplanes that risked their lives by flying over enemy airspace to bomb enemy military targets. And when in fact it was Israeli troops who entered enemy territory ?

Could it be that you are so biased against Israel, and so unbelievably anti - Israel that you try to delegitimize any of their success? Ya, that sounds about right.

And then you have the nerve to tell Kondor that HIS grasp of the 6 day war is abismal??

Way to make a fool out of yourself


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...


How is this any different than the Soviets arming the Arab nations, on the opposing side?

We do not say that the Russians LOST the war for the Arabs because the Arabs were using Soviet equipment and training.

Conversely, we cannot say that America WON the war for the Israelis because the Israelis were using American equipment and training.

Oh, and, by the way, the amount of equipment that the US had supplied to the Israelis in the period 1948-1962 was very minimal; most of their guns, munitions and rolling stock and aircraft were European (much of it French) in design and manufacture; some of it surplus bargain-basement stuff, some of it state-of-the-art for those times.

We only began to sneak fairly sizable quantities of arms into Israel through Germany beginning in 1962, to offset the growing Arab inventories being supplied by the Soviets, an $80million arrangement that was dragged out into the open in 1965, and whose later installments included the delivery of a number of M48 Patton Tanks, but, by 1967, the majority of Israeli weaponry and rolling stock and munitions and air assets were _still_ of European or local design and *NOT* American.

We only jumped in, on a grander scale, midstream when the French imposed an Arms Embargo upon Israel, breaking a long-standing tradition of arms-sales and training between the two, and, we began to step in to fill the vacuum, to replace weaponry and munitions expended in the 1967 War, and only truly racheted-up military aid and cooperation with Israel during and after the 1973 Yom Kippur War; long after the 1967 War was over.

And, of course, no US military units were deployed in active combat operations; not much of anything besides a showing of the flag on the part of the 6th Fleet and some modest intelligence and logistics support as a highly underwhelming offset to similar support being provided to the Arab combatants by both the Soviets and other regional Arab 'powers'.

The US won the 1967 Six-Day War for Israel?

Not by any sane and rational standard that I've been exposed to, to date.

Oh, and, by the way...

My grasp of the 1967 War is NOT "abismal" (sic).

My grasp of the 1967 War is modest, and not bad, for a non-stakeholding amateur and blogger.

Your grasp of *MY* grasp, on the other hand, was truly 'abysmal' (sic).


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 1, 2013)

theliq said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...


Israel may have nukes but they wouldn't use them, even on Iran, unless Iran used them first. That's the way civilized humans do things.


----------



## theliq (Dec 1, 2013)

toastman said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Where were the fighter planes from,who trained the Israeli Airforce???????whose supplied the Israeli weapons.......I have nerve and never take a backwards step.

To spew that I am anti-Israeli is complete RUBBISH....that I speak the truth,which you seem incapable of comprehending ...... Is the problem YOU HAVE.

Viva Israel,Viva Palestine.steve


----------



## theliq (Dec 1, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



So as you say....Israel WOULD USE THEM(unless Iran used them first !!!!!!That's the way CIVILISED people(human beings)do things.

I think you are somewhat confused Hoss.

1.Iran don't have Nuclear Capability.

2.Israel DO  and would use them on anyone.Civilized.....Don't THINK SO.

By your admission...........I'm the liq bringing Nations together with truth and RIGHT.

Suffer The Palestinians,come unto God/Jah.

Guys I'm right,of course I am


----------



## theliq (Dec 1, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



And where did you "SNEAK" your Nuclear capability from ???????????????????????????steve

My Grasp of your Grasp....is the real Grasp...theliq


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 1, 2013)

theliq said:


> "..._And where did you 'SNEAK' your Nuclear capability from?_..."


You concentrate on Conventional Weapons (planes, etc.) and then, when confronted with evidence that US contributions to the Israeli conventional inventory was minimal until the last minutes prior to the 1967 War, and that the majority of Israeli weaponry during the 1967 War was of European or local design and manufacture rather than American, as you had intimated...

When confronted with that, *THEN* you decide to drag Nuclear Weaponry into the mix; pretending that that was your intention all along, and masking your failure to substantiate your assertions of America supplying the lion's share of conventional weaponry prior to 1967 and winning the war for the Israelis?

No, I don't think so. Nice try. Not.

Besides, Israel was not reliably believed to be in possession of nuclear weapons prior to the 1967 Six Day War, and only began such production after the War had concluded.

Nuclear weapons and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

CIA assessments earlier that same year concluded that the Israelis were about ready to begin production and could probably produce one in 6-8 weeks, but most reliable and credible sources agree that they did not begin production until AFTER the war, and that these played no part whatsoever in influencing the outcome of the 1967 War.

If you can find credible evidence to the contrary you are welcome to produce it.



> "..._My Grasp of your Grasp....is the real Grasp...theliq_"


Your grasp is certainly... uhhhh... well... something, that's fer shure.


----------



## theliq (Dec 1, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > "..._And where did you 'SNEAK' your Nuclear capability from?_..."
> ...



Who gives a SHIT about what you drivel.......you are an irrelevance with your spew...1. Americans did supply the Israelis in 67........2. The Israelis have Nuclear,even though they still deny it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and they would use it.....WHY are there no weapons inspections now or ever.

Iran has no Nukes...Israel DOES.....which is a danger to us all..steve

Just as well,I'm always in a Great,Happy Mood as Hoss will attest to.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 2, 2013)

theliq said:


> "..._Who gives a SHIT about what you drivel.......you are an irrelevance with you spew_..."


You appear to have anger-management issues. I strongly recommend that you contact your therapist and physician, and ask them to tweak your meds again. Or, if that is off the mark, I strongly suggest a sobering cup of coffee.



> "..._1. Americans did supply the Israelis in 67_..."


Your anger-management issues and tendency to engage in knee-jerk reaction appear to be blinding you to earlier references to American arms-supplies to Israel, but making the distinction that the lion's share of the Israeli inventory in 1967 was European and local in design and manufacturer, and that American gear only comprised a minority percentage of the overall Israeli arms inventory.



> "..._2. The Israelis have Nuclear_..."


Of course they do. The issue here is whether or not such weaponry was a factor in the 1967 Six Day War. It is my contention that it was not, and I have cited supporting and credible sources for that purpose. You are welcome to counterpoiint in similar fashion.



> "..._even though they still deny it!_..."


Deny it, or simply won't say one way or another; maintaining 'nuclear opacity'?



> "..._and they would use it_..."


In extremis, yes, I believe you are correct in that assessment. Same with us.



> "..._WHY are there no weapons inspections now or ever_..."


Whatever for?



> "..._Iran has no Nukes...Israel DOES.....which is a danger to us all_..."


Iran is a medieval, dogmatic, martyrdom-encouraging, fundamentalist theocratic autocracy.

Israel is a sane, rational, modern and secularized state with mild religious undertones.

Of the two, Israel is far less of a risk as a nuclear power than Iran.


----------



## theliq (Dec 2, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > "..._Who gives a SHIT about what you drivel.......you are an irrelevance with you spew_..."
> ...



I don't know about "secularized State" there are a lot of PRE-ASSYRIAN Jewish Religious Nutters Around in Israel,who espouse that Secular Jews in Israel are NOT TRUE JEWS..Fact.

"Mildly Religious Undertones"......NOW I KNOW YOU ARE COMPLETELY MAD...you need extensive mental Help........NOW!!!!!! Come on Kondor,you ain't a bad bloke.........just cut the Zionist BULLSHIT.steve


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 2, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



Apparently,  the US is not a civilized people then, applying your own standards set forth here.

The US used nuclear weapons first, it was not in response to attacks of nuclear weapons on us, and we did it twice, in Hiroshima and in Nagasaki .

If the US would use nuclear weapons offensively, why wouldnt Israel?

Are they more civilized then the US?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 2, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Translation:
> 
> My question: "Then you, as Israeli Prime Minister, would wait until those warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace, at near-supersonic speeds - mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target in the entire country...?"
> 
> ...


"Yes"

And that's *Mr. Really*, to you.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 2, 2013)

toastman said:


> Why wait for them to attack ? How do you know that it might not be too late?


It's a little too late, for you to be talking about them being too late.

Well, it's getting late and I need some sleep.



toastman said:


> It was a given that Egypt and Syria were going to attack, so what's the issue exactly ?


That Israel has a history of making up reasons to attack sovereign nations that goes all the way back to the Zionist migrations at the turn of the last century.  Zionists have made it clear by their actions (that have spanned over a century), they do not care about international law, the rights and suffering of others, or Judaism.  All Zionists care about, is furthering their own fascist agenda.

From declaring the Wailing Wall theirs in '29, to all of Palestine theirs in '48, to their territorial expansion in '67 and to the Lebanese war in '06, they have been making up excuses every step of the way.  And anyone who objects, becomes a target.

Say whatever you want to put lipstick on that pig, I'm telling you right now, that emperor, does not have any clothes.



toastman said:


> Do you really think that they would mass their troops and tanks, etc.. while threatening Israel, just for fun ???


Massing troops doesn't mean an attack is automatically imminent.  It could be a show of strength. Locker room chest thumping.



toastman said:


> Israel took out their air force BEFORE they could do any damage.. They had secret confidential info about where their airports were BTW.


They also took out a US ship, which I'm still pretty pissed about.



toastman said:


> It's called military intelligence


It's called "aggression", which is a war crime.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 2, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...



There is simply no reason for the Israelis to use nukes in a first strike role. Israel has shown repeatedly that its conventional forces are superior to any islamist nation or allied islamist nations.  

There will be continuing skirmishes with various islamist terrorist syndicates: islamic jihad, Hamas, "hizzbollocks", etc., but those threats can be managed with conventional weapons and armies. 

As we see more often than not in islamist societies, moslems are the greatest threat to other moslems. The internecine war being waged in Syria is just the latest example of that dynamic.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 2, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Translation:
> ...



*And, given that the full range of conditions were spelled out in Post No. 163, which you no doubt saw prior to responding...*



Kondor3 said:


> ...Meanwhile, I want to be very clear about something.
> 
> If you were the Israeli Prime Minister, and tasked with the defense of Israel...
> 
> ...



*You STILL responded "Yes".*

For all intents and purposes, saying...

"_Yes. I would wait until Arab warplanes had crossed into Israeli airspace; mere seconds or minutes from any strategic or tactical target within Israel; despite the fact that many bombers would get through my air defenses; despite the fact that I would suffer hundreds or thousands of civilian casualties from the bombing; despite the fact that my own air-assets or armored formations or troop concentrations might be irreparably damaged; thereby crippling my nation's defenses; all in the name of observing the strict letter of international law._"

In light of the history and content of this particular exchange, there is no other way for a reasonable person to interpret what you have said.

Consequently, and sadly, I am obliged to observe...

Your own people would string you up from a lamppost as a traitor. *Any* people so-betrayed would do so. And you would deserve it.

More likely, some member of your General Staff would put a bullet through your brain, long before the mob of grief-maddened parents and spouses got hold of you. And you would deserve it.

But at least you would have the satisfaction, in your last few milliseconds of existence as you were launched into eternity, of having observed the letter of international law, even though it cost your people thousands of civilian lives and crippled your defenses and set the stage for the defeat and annihilation of your own people.

Nobody (myself, least of all) is saying that a preemptive strike is legal - in whole or in part - based upon Article 51 of the UN Charter or other preexisting or subsequent international law - but there are times when a preemptive strike is absolutely necessary in order to prevent a disaster and great harm to one's own people, when the adversary has already publicly declared his intentions and then maneuvered into position to carry out such threats. National survival trumps international law every time.

I am assuming that you are merely being obtuse in support of your own well-established position in support of the Palestinians and adherence to international law, and that, when faced with such a terrible choice in the Real World, that you would actually make a choice akin to that made by the Israeli Prime Minister in 1967.

I am assuming that you actually would preemptively strike your enemy's air-assets and to whittle them down and neutralize much of them, before they could inflict those thousands of civilian casualties and cripple your nation's defenses; in effect, that, by saying 'Yes', you are dissembling merely for the sake of showmanship and consistency with your established pattern of advocacy.

Most rational and sane and pragmatic people would have similar difficulty, believing that anyone, similarly sane and rational and pragmatic, could sacrifice his own people in favor of blind adherence to a provision of international law.

However, if I am wrong, and if this is *TRULY* what you would do when faced with just such a situation, then, sadly, I am left with no other choice but to judge you as an Idiot.

One capable of intelligent thought and articulation, but a Fool's Fool, not part of the Real World, and someone to write-off and to not take seriously, with respect to the affairs of Nations and Men.

It is my hope that you disabuse me of such a sad conclusion over time, but I am beginning to have my doubts as to whether that is even possible, in light of what you've just told us about your impracticality and intransigence and callous disregard for your own people, merely so that your own conscience can remain intact and lily-white within the framework of adherence to international law.

You may very well delude yourself that through such a blind adherence, you are demonstrating moral courage, but, the flip side of that argument is...

By failing to act to save your people before such damage can be inflicted, you are demonstrating moral cowardice by valuing your own personal integrity and conscience above the survival of your own people...

Rather than metaphorically falling on your sword, and soiling your conscience with the guilt of a first-strike against a declared and coiled and poised enemy force, sacrificing your conscience so that your people may live...

*THAT* is the ultimate sacrifice that Leaders of Nations and Men are occasionally asked to make in a genuine and legitimate national risk-danger framework...

*THAT* that is the chance that such leaders are sometimes obliged to take ...

And you, for one, do *not* appear to have what it takes, even on the theoretical discussion level, to meet such challenges.

Holding your own conscience above the survival of your own country, in a legitimate national-danger scenario. You appear to be selfish in matters of conscience, in the very worst of all possible ways.

Truly unmanly, disgusting, and pathetic.

My condolences.


----------



## theliq (Dec 2, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



As a supporter of a free Palestine and Israel,Israel has no strategic fear of Palestine at all,why posters after all this time think otherwise is obsurd.

The closest we got to Peace in this schism was scuttled when the rabid Jews assassinated Mr Rabin the Israeli Prime Minister.....previously he was head of the Military,he realised that for both Israel and the Palestinians PEACE could and would be achieved.

Both Rabin and Simon Peres were Titans against the minority agitating Jews(we all know who and what they are) Mr Rabin paid the ultimate price,with his life.

  Only Israel and Palestinians(Cousins and Semitic peoples) will resolve this matter.......other Arab nations are of no help to the Palestinians or Israelis...in fact quite the reverse.

The history of both nations are inter-twined.

Viva Palestine..Viva Israel


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 2, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> *And, given that the full range of conditions were spelled out in Post No. 163, which you no doubt saw prior to responding...*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Congratulations!

You just broke the record for using the most words, to say nothing at all.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 2, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> "..._Congratulations! You just broke the record for using the most words, to say nothing at all._"


Oh, I said _plenty_. Ask around.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 2, 2013)

Egypt had no intention of attacking Israel and Israel knew that .

The strikes on Egypt in 1967 are simply one more illustration of Israel finding an opportunity to make another unlawful land grab.

War criminals will be war criminals!

Stealing land is in the Zionist DNA!


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 2, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Egypt had no intention of attacking Israel and Israel knew that .
> 
> The strikes on Egypt in 1967 are simply one more illustration of Israel finding an opportunity to make another unlawful land grab.
> 
> ...


"Win some, lose some".
~~Vinny Gambini


----------



## theliq (Dec 5, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > Egypt had no intention of attacking Israel and Israel knew that .
> ...



NET AND YAH WHO Don't  deal with Terrorist Hey Hoss.............So what are ZIONISTS...and NAZIS


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Oh, I said _plenty_. Ask around.


I did.  They took the 5th.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Egypt had no intention of attacking Israel and Israel knew that .
> 
> The strikes on Egypt in 1967 are simply one more illustration of Israel finding an opportunity to make another unlawful land grab.
> 
> ...



 Nonsense. Egypt had every intention of attacking Israel. You believe otherwise because your rabid Joooooo hatreds don't allow you make rational, reasoned assessments. 

Your obvious biases make you a poor candidate for offering objective analysis which is why your rants are dismissed as pointless blathering.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Nonsense. Egypt had every intention of attacking Israel. You believe otherwise because your rabid Joooooo hatreds don't allow you make rational, reasoned assessments.
> 
> Your obvious biases make you a poor candidate for offering objective analysis which is why your rants are dismissed as pointless blathering.


You're no one to talk about being objective.

Israeli tanks rolled into Egypt to start the war.

That's an historical fact, your psycho bullshit can't change.


----------



## toastman (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, I said _plenty_. Ask around.
> ...



It's not his fault you can't read more than one paragraph. LOL


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Nonsense. Egypt had every intention of attacking Israel. You believe otherwise because your rabid Joooooo hatreds don't allow you make rational, reasoned assessments.
> ...



It's an objective fact that Egypt had made all preparations for a war they were prepared to initiate. They were prepared to resolve the humiliating defeat they suffered earlier.

Your Joooooo-Hatin' priorities leave you as poorly equipped as Sherri is for any objective analysis for why Egyptian infantry and armor was positioned for a strike.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> It's an objective fact that Egypt had made all preparations for a war they were prepared to initiate. They were prepared to resolve the humiliating defeat they suffered earlier.
> 
> Your Joooooo-Hatin' priorities leave you as poorly equipped as Sherri is for any objective analysis for why Egyptian infantry and armor was positioned for a strike.


But they didn't strike, Israel did.

And you can shove that _*"joo hating" *_bullshit up your ass!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

toastman said:


> It's not his fault you can't read more than one paragraph. LOL


I read the whole thing.

It's nothing but conjecture and innuendo.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's an objective fact that Egypt had made all preparations for a war they were prepared to initiate. They were prepared to resolve the humiliating defeat they suffered earlier.
> ...



This has been explained to you in excruciating detail. Your weak cognitive skills are not my concern.


----------



## theliq (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


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



Stop Hollie assuming that people who disagree with you are "JEW HATERS or JOO HATING"

like you they are expressing their OPINION.

You are playing the HATE CARD,far to often.......if you continue in this vain folk will stop listening.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

theliq said:


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



A little naïve there, no?

To suggest that there is not an identifiable cabal of rabid Joooooo haters is avoiding an identifiable reality. The constant use of the f-bomb aimed at the Jooooos might have clued you in. I dont believe the identifiable cabal noted above is stupid or ignorant of the problems surrounding the Arab/moslem-Israeli conflict, or the desires of the islamist terrorist organizations operating in the area. 

With reference to the parties in the Arab/moslem-Israeli conflict, Ive made choices and come to conclusions about which side has interests which are furthering of the qualities that define Western civilization and which side has consistently followed a path of hate, theocratic totalitarianism and self-destruction. These are not _just_ opinions, they are a part of objective reality. 

The behavior of the latter group is so valuable for a glimpse into the historical, utterly insane logic of moslems and Islam's jihad. Moslems embrace the most totalitarian ideology ever to part company with man's imagination and intellect. It consumes all that people are and, as our enthusiastic mass murderers so amply demonstrate, it demands the relinquishment of all that defines us as human. 

Sadly, the end result is that which is utterly antithetical to what defines us as humans--a thorough cheapening of life's value.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> A little naïve there, no?
> 
> To suggest that there is not an identifiable cabal of rabid Joooooo haters is avoiding an identifiable reality.


 Then there shouldn't be a problem for you to say why you think these people hate jews.


Hollie said:


> The constant use of the f-bomb aimed at the Jooooos might have clued you in.


 You're the only one I see using that "f-bomb" on a regular basis.

Are you saying you're a "jew hater"?


Hollie said:


> I dont believe the identifiable cabal noted above is stupid or ignorant of the problems surrounding the Arab/moslem-Israeli conflict, or the desires of the islamist terrorist organizations operating in the area.


 But you are deliberately ignorant of Israel's role and contributions to that problem.


Hollie said:


> With reference to the parties in the Arab/moslem-Israeli conflict, Ive made choices and come to conclusions about which side has interests which are furthering of the qualities that define Western civilization...


 You've done nothing of the kind.  Western civilization embraces democracy, justice and the rule of law.  Those are 3 things your posts are completely void of.  You embrace fascism and attack anyone with a different opinion than yours.


Hollie said:


> ...and which side has consistently followed a path of hate, theocratic totalitarianism and self-destruction. These are not _just_ opinions, they are a part of objective reality.


 You're the only one who hates on that level around here.


Hollie said:


> The behavior of the latter group is so valuable for a glimpse into the historical, utterly insane logic of moslems and Islam's jihad. Moslems embrace the most totalitarian ideology ever to part company with man's imagination and intellect. It consumes all that people are and, as our enthusiastic mass murderers so amply demonstrate, it demands the relinquishment of all that defines us as human.
> 
> Sadly, the end result is that which is utterly antithetical to what defines us as humans--a thorough cheapening of life's value.


 There's no humanity in your posts, so why act like there is?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> This has been explained to you in excruciating detail. Your weak cognitive skills are not my concern.


On the contrary, I've asked you several times to explain why you think I hate jews and that's one question you have never answered.


----------



## toastman (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > A little naïve there, no?
> ...



There's no humanity in her posts ?? Wtf are you talking about ?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

toastman said:


> There's no humanity in her posts ?? Wtf are you talking about ?


Show me one post of hers where's she's indicated any empathy for what the Palestinian's are going through?

Just one!


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > A little naïve there, no?
> ...



You're as befuddled as usual, Loinboy.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > There's no humanity in her posts ?? Wtf are you talking about ?
> ...



Well, for that matter, show me one post of yours that included a rational, reasoned argument.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Well, for that matter, show me one post of yours that included a rational, reasoned argument.


The overwhelming majority of them do.

But you see only what you want to see and you don't want to see that.


----------



## toastman (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > There's no humanity in her posts ?? Wtf are you talking about ?
> ...



That has nothing to do with her lacking humanity in her posts....


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Well, for that matter, show me one post of yours that included a rational, reasoned argument.
> ...



You give yourself credit for nothing.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> You're as befuddled as usual, Loinboy.


I'm not the one making irresponsible statements not grounded in reality.

Why do you think I hate jews?

C'mon, you dishrag whore, answer the question!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> You give yourself credit for nothing.


I'm explaining a fact and anyone who sees my posts can see that.

All you do is throw out bullshit innuendo's and conjecture.


----------



## toastman (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You give yourself credit for nothing.
> ...



Just because that's how YOU see her posts, doesn't make it true


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You're as befuddled as usual, Loinboy.
> ...


Nice language to use to a lady, cum bubble.


----------



## theliq (Dec 5, 2013)

toastman said:


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



The problem Toastie,All this Tit for Tat dialogue can be castigated from both sides and both sides have a fair point.

I really am only interested in the future...and freedom for the Palestinians from the Israeli YOKE,for no other interpretation that can be drawn.

Give Palestinians their State and Israel theirs.

This would benefit both peoples......there is NO point now dwelling in the past,horrific as it has been.

Viva Palestine...Viva Israel...steve


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You're as befuddled as usual, Loinboy.
> ...



Well, actually, Loinboy, your post above qualifies as "irresponsible statements not grounded in reality".


I suppose I should say "thank you" for the allowance you gave yourself for making "irresponsible statements not grounded in reality". 

So, Thanks.


----------



## toastman (Dec 5, 2013)

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



If only it were that easy, Steve


----------



## toastman (Dec 5, 2013)

Hossfly said:


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



He could change his username, but the childish insults still have not changed


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

toastman said:


> That has nothing to do with her lacking humanity in her posts....


That's one way to prove it.

As an example, being outraged over the shooting of Palestinian fisherman, is a common, humane reaction.  Because when you think about it, who the fuck shoots at people _*FISHING!*_ Who in their right mind, would think fishing is a capital crime?  Or a threat to national security?

Someone who cares about humanity, does not think those thoughts.  

Someone who doesn't give a shit about humanity, does.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

toastman said:


> He could change his username, but the childish insults still have not changed


I see no reason to be nice to her.

I also see you think it's okay to make baseless accusations (you can't explain) against others.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > That has nothing to do with her lacking humanity in her posts....
> ...



I'm outraged if you're outraged.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Nice language to use to a lady, cum bubble.


Judging from the racist hatred that comes off her keyboard 24/7, she ain't no lady.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > He could change his username, but the childish insults still have not changed
> ...



Don't "baseless accusations" define the majority of your posts?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> I'm outraged if you're outraged.


I'm outraged, what say you?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Don't "baseless accusations" define the majority of your posts?


No, because I explain why I said what I said.

Whenever you do that, the accusation is not baseless.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Nice language to use to a lady, cum bubble.
> ...



What "racist hatred" would that be?

Are you defining Moslems, "Palestinian" arabs as a "race"?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Well, actually, Loinboy, your post above qualifies as "irresponsible statements not grounded in reality".
> 
> 
> I suppose I should say "thank you" for the allowance you gave yourself for making "irresponsible statements not grounded in reality".
> ...


I asked you a question.  How is that not grounded in reality?


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Nice language to use to a lady, cum bubble.
> ...


What racist hatred are you seeing? No one else does.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> What "racist hatred" would that be?
> 
> Are you defining Moslems, "Palestinian" arabs as a "race"?


Wipe your ass with that semantic bullshit.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Don't "baseless accusations" define the majority of your posts?
> ...



When you attempt to explain your pointless comments, you typically appear befuddled.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> When you attempt to explain your pointless comments, you typically appear befuddled.


That's only what you choose to perceive and has nothing to do with me.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > What "racist hatred" would that be?
> ...



So, your "racist" canard was pointless, ill-considered and just more of your hysterics, right?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > When you attempt to explain your pointless comments, you typically appear befuddled.
> ...



See, you're still befuddled.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> See, you're still befuddled.


Your reactions to my posts are more about you, than they are about me.  

These are your choices, you are making_*...........OWN THEM!*_


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> So, your "racist" canard was pointless, ill-considered and just more of your hysterics, right?


You know exactly what I meant.

Why do you think I hate jews?

Are you going to answer that question?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > See, you're still befuddled.
> ...



Thanks.

The melodrama was juvenile.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> See, you're still befuddled.


Why do you think my posts appear befuddled?

Care to explain that baseless accusation in more detail?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > So, your "racist" canard was pointless, ill-considered and just more of your hysterics, right?
> ...



It's clear _you_ have no idea what you meant.

The wages of befuddlement.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Thanks.
> 
> The melodrama was juvenile.


I guess you didn't do well in college?

Because that is what is taught in philosophy and psychology 101.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks.
> ...



That's what they taught you at the madrassah?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> It's clear _you_ have no idea what you meant.
> 
> The wages of befuddlement.


Care to explain that in more detail?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 5, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's clear _you_ have no idea what you meant.
> ...



Already did.

Still befuddled?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> That's what they taught you at the madrassah?


All you do is put labels on things.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 5, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Already did.
> 
> Still befuddled?


All you did was make a claim, you didn't say why you think I'm befuddled?

Hey, were you *Stinger* at another website?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 6, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Already did.
> ...



Actually, I did.

Are you moving on to conspiracy theories now?


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 6, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


Not always... but oftentimes... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 ... not to mention automatic gainsay... you're on the right track...


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 6, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Actually, I did.
> 
> Are you moving on to conspiracy theories now?


There's no conspiracy and no, you didn't.

Here's all your comments on this issue and not one of them explains the reasons behind your bullshit claim.



> _*Hollies* comments...
> 
> *Post #242*
> When you attempt to explain your pointless comments, you typically appear befuddled.
> ...


So, are you going to tell me why you think I'm "befuddled", or continue to play these bullshit word games?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 6, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, I did.
> ...


Sheesh. You're even more befuddled than I thought.


----------



## toastman (Dec 6, 2013)

Hollie said:


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



Haha I was thinking the same thing lol !


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 6, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Sheesh. You're even more befuddled than I thought.


Care to explain why you "thought" that?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 6, 2013)

toastman said:


> Haha I was thinking the same thing lol !


Alright, how about you?

Care to explain why you thought that?


----------



## toastman (Dec 6, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Sheesh. You're even more befuddled than I thought.
> ...



She fuckin did . Learn to read !


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 6, 2013)

toastman said:


> She fuckin did . Learn to read !


I posted all her comments on this issue, none of them explain why she thinks I'm "befuddled".

But now I'm asking you to explain why you thought that, since you said you were thinking the same thing.

Are you going to answer the question?  Or continue to make bullshit statements, like she does?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 6, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > She fuckin did . Learn to read !
> ...


Some introspection on your part would help to soften your befuddlement.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 6, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Some introspection on your part would help to soften your befuddlement.


Why is it, you cannot explain, the reason behind your claim?

Why can't you answer a simple little question?  

What is the reason why you said, what you said?

That's all I'm asking.  Are you really that retarded, that you don't know why you say things?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 6, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Some introspection on your part would help to soften your befuddlement.
> ...



It's remarkable that you have such difficulty with the simple tasks.


----------



## toastman (Dec 6, 2013)

Hollie said:


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



Amazing eh?

You need to explain everything to him !


----------



## toastman (Dec 6, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Some introspection on your part would help to soften your befuddlement.
> ...



I must say, it is fun watching you squirm


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

toastman said:


> I must say, it is fun watching you squirm


Say's the troll to a member.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Hollie said:


> It's remarkable that you have such difficulty with the simple tasks.


And just what "difficulty" and "simple tasks", are you referring to?

Are you going to answer that question?

Or do you prefer to keep trolling?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

toastman said:


> Amazing eh?
> 
> You need to explain everything to him !


That's the thing.  She hasn't explained anything.  That's why I keep asking?  

She just makes bullshit claim after bullshit claim, without explaining the reason behind her bullshit claim.

And you admire that?  Trolling?  Do you think trolls are hero's?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Amazing eh?
> ...



Other than for attention seeking, you seem pretty dull when it comes to understanding what you've been told.


----------



## toastman (Dec 7, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Other than for attention seeking, you seem pretty dull when it comes to understanding what you've been told.


Oh I understand it.

I understand you can't say why you said it.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Other than for attention seeking, you seem pretty dull when it comes to understanding what you've been told.
> ...



You don't understand - you're too befuddled to "get it".


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Hollie said:


> You don't understand - you're too befuddled to "get it".


Another claim you can't back up.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You don't understand - you're too befuddled to "get it".
> ...



Already did.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

Terrorism Havens: Palestinian Authority

Terrorism Havens: Palestinian Authority - Council on Foreign Relations



> Is the Palestinian Authority a haven for terrorism?
> 
> Yes. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the secular al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades&#8212;all formally classified as terrorist groups by the U.S. government&#8212;operate from the Palestinian-ruled territories governed by Mahmoud Abbas, who succeeded Yasir Arafat as leader of the Fatah party. The al-Aqsa Brigades are closely tied to the al-Fatah faction, but Israelis and Palestinians differ bitterly over what role Arafat and his regime played in terrorism, and many Palestinians say that violent resistance to Israeli occupation and settlement-building is legitimate.



Why is it that Israel, which won land fighting a defensive war initiated by arab/moslem Crusaders is expected to return that land to the people who have never stopped murdering that nation's citizens? One might also ask how a political entity founded on arrogant enmity and barbaric terror could be invited into the august halls (such as they are) of the United Nations, or how its dead archterrorist leader could have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. A better question would be: Where is the sanity, morality, and justice in a world that sides with hateful, vicious killers against a free, democratic state governed and constrained by the rule of law?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Terrorism Havens: Palestinian Authority
> 
> Terrorism Havens: Palestinian Authority - Council on Foreign Relations
> 
> ...


You cannot hold onto land seized in a war.

It has been illegal since the end of WWII.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Hollie said:


> Already did.


No you didn't.

You just made another claim.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Already did.
> ...



It makes you crazy to be the self-made fool, right?


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Terrorism Havens: Palestinian Authority
> ...


*You can always try taking it back.

Although the US will help to support or defend Israel as needed - using your tax dollars - thank you very much.*


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


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



It's not surprising that the usual suspects have no issue with land being taken in Islam's jihad. 

That somehow gets a pass.


----------



## toastman (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Terrorism Havens: Palestinian Authority
> ...



Again, you fool, since when do the victors o a war give back seized land to a people in which they still have hostilities in ??


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

toastman said:


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



Bingo!

The lands seized in wars initiated by arabs/moslems are wars that are still being waged by the arab/moslem aggressors.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 7, 2013)

There are certainly some Zionist posters here with faulty ideas about international law. Occupations were never intended to last permanently, certainly not 45+ years. And the fact is the only thing keeping this Occupation ongoing is Israel's refusal to move her land thieving scum of the earth illegal settlers off of the lands they illegally squat on. 

I thank God I am not an illegal settler, thank you God for this Blessing.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Terrorism Havens: Palestinian Authority
> ...



You certainly can hold land seized in a war if it is a defensive war.  How many times do you need telling?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> There are certainly some Zionist posters here with faulty ideas about international law. Occupations were never intended to last permanently, certainly not 45+ years. And the fact is the only thing keeping this Occupation ongoing is Israel's refusal to move her land thieving scum of the earth illegal settlers off of the lands they illegally squat on.
> 
> I thank God I am not an illegal settler, thank you God for this Blessing.



It seems some islamist posters have some skewed ideas about international law. Arab squatters have no claim to squatters rights by mere virtue of islamist ideology and the islamist precept of _waqf_

The land stealing "Palestinian" arabs survive only with the benefit of UN supplied welfare dollars. The "Pals" are unable to function as viable society, thus they need to go back their arab homelands.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 7, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> ... Occupations were never intended to last permanently..."


True.

Muslims have occupied the Temple Mount in Jerusalem for more than 1300 years; on land stolen from the Jews; sacred ground that bloodthirsty Muslim conquerors profaned.






When are the Muslims going to end their occupation of the Temple Mount, disassemble the Dome of the Rock mosque, and reassemble it in Saudi Arabia or some other place where it's wanted?


----------



## Lipush (Dec 7, 2013)

One day....


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 7, 2013)

Lipush said:


> One day....


One (1) well placed Hellfire missle.............


----------



## Lipush (Dec 7, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > One day....
> ...


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Muslims have occupied the Temple Mount in Jerusalem for more than 1300 years; on land stolen from the Jews;


You can't steal something from someone who wasn't there.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> You certainly can hold land seized in a war if it is a defensive war.  How many times do you need telling?


It doesn't matter.  

And it wasn't a defensive war. Israel attacked Egypt.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Hollie said:


> It seems some islamist posters have some skewed ideas about international law.


You don't know fucking shit about international law, so why even comment on it?



Hollie said:


> Arab squatters have no claim to squatters rights by mere virtue of islamist ideology and the islamist precept of _waqf_


They weren't squatters.  They owned 90% of the land in Palestine before being driven out by jewish terrorists.



Hollie said:


> The land stealing "Palestinian" arabs survive only with the benefit of UN supplied welfare dollars. The "Pals" are unable to function as viable society, thus they need to go back their arab homelands.


That's because the occupation and blockade has crippled their economy.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> There are certainly some Zionist posters here with faulty ideas about international law. Occupations were never intended to last permanently, certainly not 45+ years. And the fact is the only thing keeping this Occupation ongoing is Israel's refusal to move her land thieving scum of the earth illegal settlers off of the lands they illegally squat on.
> 
> I thank God I am not an illegal settler, thank you God for this Blessing.


You call them settlers; I call them Israeli insurgents.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > There are certainly some Zionist posters here with faulty ideas about international law. Occupations were never intended to last permanently, certainly not 45+ years. And the fact is the only thing keeping this Occupation ongoing is Israel's refusal to move her land thieving scum of the earth illegal settlers off of the lands they illegally squat on.
> ...



We call them inheritance deliverers


----------



## Lipush (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims have occupied the Temple Mount in Jerusalem for more than 1300 years; on land stolen from the Jews;
> ...



The Temple was there.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Lipush said:


> The Temple was there.


The jews were not.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > The Temple was there.
> ...



Jews were _always _in Israel.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > One day....
> ...



Or one mis-placed islamist splodeydope.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Jews were _always _in Israel.


And so were arabs.

They both lived in relative peace until the Zionists showed up.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> We call them inheritance deliverers


I call them psycho's, who murdered their own PM, because he wanted peace with the Palestinian's.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Jews were _always _in Israel.
> ...



Zionists were ALWAYS in Israel. Those Jews you talk about were Zionists. It took WW2 and their brothers from Europe to come home, to make them want to start fighting.

Zionists didn't "show up", they were just to afraid to act for independence.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > We call them inheritance deliverers
> ...



What you say is slander.

Yigal Amir wasn't a settler, and the settlers didn't at all back his actions.

He was a religious fanatic who only represented the wicked among us.

Settlers are nothing like him.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> What you say is slander.
> 
> Yigal Amir wasn't a settler, and the settlers didn't at all back his actions.
> 
> ...


They're worse!  They murder with impunity.



> _On August 29, Addameer said *Israeli settlers keep targeting Daraghneh family members*. They live in Laban village near Nablus. Incidents happen virtually daily. The latest one left two children hospitalized.
> 
> *Settlers are armed and extremely violent. They know they can do what they want and get away with it. Women and children are attacked like men. Property is damaged or destroyed.*
> 
> ...


And you act like this doesn't create hate?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Zionists were ALWAYS in Israel. Those Jews you talk about were Zionists. It took WW2 and their brothers from Europe to come home, to make them want to start fighting.
> 
> Zionists didn't "show up", they were just to afraid to act for independence.


According to migration records at the time, you are mistaken.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > You certainly can hold land seized in a war if it is a defensive war.  How many times do you need telling?
> ...



It does matter.  A country can hold on to land if won in a defensive war.  
You aren't very knowledgeable on the issue are you.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Zionists were ALWAYS in Israel. Those Jews you talk about were Zionists. It took WW2 and their brothers from Europe to come home, to make them want to start fighting.
> ...



Read my post again, you obviously missed my point.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > What you say is slander.
> ...



I don't find any source supporting that but the Arab media, which I don't trust. If I ask the Jews involved I'm not sure they'd give the same version.

Why should I believe the Palestinians and not the Jews regarding this?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Jordan did not own the West Bank. Egypt did not own the Gaza Strip.

It was not their land to lose.


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



bullSHIT Lippy BULLSHIT INDEED


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> I don't find any source supporting that but the Arab media, which I don't trust. If I ask the Jews involved I'm not sure they'd give the same version.
> 
> Why should I believe the Palestinians and not the Jews regarding this?


Well, the source I was using was Canadian and non-partisan.

BTW, murderers don't normally admit their crimes to others and automatically dismissing reports when you have no evidence to lead you to that conclusion, is pretty retarded.


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



idiot


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Read my post again, you obviously missed my point.


You obviously missed mine.

The majority of Zionists migrated into the area.

That's why arabs owned almost 90% of the land rights until then.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> It does matter.  A country can hold on to land if won in a defensive war.
> You aren't very knowledgeable on the issue are you.


Prove it.  It's as simple as that.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Read my post again, you obviously missed my point.
> ...



Many Zionists migrated, that is correct. But what is incorrect is saying "before the Zionists came".

That statement itself is not factual. "Zionists" didn't "show up". they were ALWAYS there.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Many Zionists migrated, that is correct. But what is incorrect is saying "before the Zionists came".
> 
> That statement itself is not factual. "Zionists" didn't "show up". they were ALWAYS there.


You call them Zionists, I call them indigenous jews.  

I don't know whether or not they embraced Zionist ideology, I do know there was no major incidents of violence with indigenous arabs, until the migrations.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



Zionism was created in Europe and did not even exist until the 1800s.

They immigrated to Israel, or should I more accurately say Palestine, just like you did.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 8, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...




Why do you choose not to address the influx of arab immigrants from Jordan, Syria, Egypt, etc., who squatted on the land you "more accurately call Palestine"?


----------



## Jroc (Dec 8, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...




Israel was "Created" By G-d during the exodus from Egypt .the Jewish people are Israel the first Zionist was Moses...."True story"


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Israel recaptured what was rightfully theirs in the first place.  Pay attention.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

theliq said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Lipush.

It's nice to make your acquaintance.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Abraham was the first Zionist.

Zionism started in Genesis.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



I am paying attention.

The West Bank and Gaza were occupied Palestinian land. They did not belong to Jordan and Egypt. You can't win something from somebody if they do not own it.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Did I ever tell you about San Remo Mandate.  I could swear I did.  Would you like to save me the trouble of posting it again (for the ninth time as I am keeping count), or would you like me for the ninth time to inform you again.  I am very patient so I could if you want to know about it.  I do believe you have the memory of a goldfish.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



You have, but I asked you to quote the passages that prove the point that you alleged.

You have not done so. Or did you forget?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Why are you assuming that anyone was occupying "Palestinian" arab land when "Palestinian" arabs are an invented people with an invented nationality.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



You need to watch this again, and when there are quotes from the Mandate, stop the video and read them.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubDhnM0MUmY]Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Seen it.

Where does San Remo say what you claim?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Within the very first minute.  UN Resolutions are not legally binding, including the Partition Plan.  Watch the video.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



I am not interested in the interpretations of a propagandist.

Quote the passages that prove what you claim.


----------



## toastman (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Why is he a propagandist?? Because he doesn't kiss Palestinian ass?


----------



## toastman (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Don't bother with Tinmore. Even when you prove something to him, he will still claim it is false and he is right.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



You nailed it.

Tinmore brings that stupid "restless in Gaza and Jerusalem" video every chance he gets. If that doesn't have "propagandonist" written all over it, I don't know what does


----------



## toastman (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



 so true.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



All here, in black and white.

Howard Grief: Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Read it.

Quote the passage that proves your claim.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Lipush said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



What do you have against those nice young women?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Do you have reading comprehension problems?


----------



## Lipush (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



I have nothing against them.

I have something against constant "Copy-Paste", especially a youtube one.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Not at all. It is Grief who has the problem. You wouldn't notice because you probably have not read San Remo.


----------



## toastman (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...




No, he has ignoring the truth problem.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Did I ever tell you about San Remo Mandate.  I could swear I did.  Would you like to save me the trouble of posting it again (for the ninth time as I am keeping count), or would you like me for the ninth time to inform you again.  I am very patient so I could if you want to know about it.  I do believe you have the memory of a goldfish.


And do you realize the Mandate also had the caveat that the state of Israel could be created, as long as it didn't disenfranchise the existing non-Jewish population...


> _"His Majestys Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object,* it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may 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.
> 
> - Arthur James Balfour, [Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs]
> _


...which it obviously did.

Ergo, Zionists did not honor the Mandate.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Did I ever tell you about San Remo Mandate.  I could swear I did.  Would you like to save me the trouble of posting it again (for the ninth time as I am keeping count), or would you like me for the ninth time to inform you again.  I am very patient so I could if you want to know about it.  I do believe you have the memory of a goldfish.
> ...


The non-Jewish population skedaddled, called it the Nakba, sent up a scream for "right of return", then went onto the UN welfare plan and remain to this day. Still whining. Read Brittanica Encyclopaedia for accurate account. End of story.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> The non-Jewish population skedaddled, called it the Nakba, sent up a scream for "right of return", then went onto the UN welfare plan and remain to this day. Still whining. Read Brittanica Encyclopaedia for accurate account. End of story.


They were driven out by jewish terrorists.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > The non-Jewish population skedaddled, called it the Nakba, sent up a scream for "right of return", then went onto the UN welfare plan and remain to this day. Still whining. Read Brittanica Encyclopaedia for accurate account. End of story.
> ...


That's B.S. and you know it.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > The non-Jewish population skedaddled, called it the Nakba, sent up a scream for "right of return", then went onto the UN welfare plan and remain to this day. Still whining. Read Brittanica Encyclopaedia for accurate account. End of story.
> ...



AKA Zionist colonial settlers/ethnic cleansers!


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 8, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



It is Truth, a thing a Zionist like you is completely devoid of!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> AKA Zionist colonial settlers/ethnic cleansers!


Insurgents.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> That's B.S. and you know it.


What was Irgun?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Did I ever tell you about San Remo Mandate.  I could swear I did.  Would you like to save me the trouble of posting it again (for the ninth time as I am keeping count), or would you like me for the ninth time to inform you again.  I am very patient so I could if you want to know about it.  I do believe you have the memory of a goldfish.
> ...



Actually, the mandate opposed a Jewish state. It was supposed to be a shared state with equal rights for all.

The Zionists pushed the mandate off course and Britain left in a monumental flop without fulfilling its mandate.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 8, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...


Justice.


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2013)

Hossfly said:


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



Justice,I know you are wrong here Hoss......and a small mute point here.......You should NEVER use ZIONIST AND JUSTICE IN THE SAME SENTENCE,Hoss.....NEVER,EVER...steve


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 8, 2013)

theliq said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


I beg to differ, Steve. See post #347. True story.


----------



## theliq (Dec 9, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



I will check it out Hoss,I have and you must remember that Balfour and the Commissioner for Palestine at the time were ZIONISTS moreover the British Jewish parliamentarians pushing this agenda at that time were also ZIONISTS....this area was only their dream area and had no relevance to fact at all.

This area was always known as The Mandate of Palestine.......the word Israel was never used....as you full well know.

As you would or should know that from mainly 1922 to 1945 there was mass illegal Jewish migration from Germany to Palestine,with Zionist/Nazi collaboration,including ARMS Etc,.

The Arms were used by Zionist Terrorist MURDER SQUADS,of which the Israeli Prime Minister "BEGIN" was the leader of the worst and violent terrorist Zionist guerilla groups at the time .The peaceful but naïve Palestinians paid the ultimate price with their families slaughtered,dispossion and exile.

Some twat on here recently said that during this period that there were 517!!!!!!Palestinians compared to 8000 Jews lived in the Mandate of Palestine...........Fuck Wit.....this Morphed after the Israeli formation.....and this was Israeli Government/Zionist Mantra,taught in schools that this area was empty before the Jews arrived.....this poses two problems of Israel,well three actually.

Number One....the remaining mainly Christian Palestinians living there......Number Two the thousand or so Palestinian towns and villages  which had been razed,which were still visable and Number Three the number of Palestinian Refugee camps on the border of other countries.

Really Hoss your summation of the situation of those times are not only erroneous but a down right lie.

Zionists Hey........The World's Biggest BULLSHIT ARTISTS.....and that's saying something.......Lying is part of their personna.......NO NUCLEAR fcuk you have to hand it to them,they have more front than a MACK TRUCK.

But the world know,that's why Israel around world are on the nose.

You will note that in the UN more countries support the Palestinians than they do Israel,by a margin


It just confirms my Quote of NEVER use ZIONISTS AND JUSTICE in the same sentence

I like you Hoss....but fcuk knows how you would ever want to follow and support the disgraced Zionist MANTRA.

Your friend Steve


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Did I ever tell you about San Remo Mandate.  I could swear I did.  Would you like to save me the trouble of posting it again (for the ninth time as I am keeping count), or would you like me for the ninth time to inform you again.  I am very patient so I could if you want to know about it.  I do believe you have the memory of a goldfish.
> ...



How did the Jews not honor the Mandate.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> How did the Jews not honor the Mandate.


Did you not read Lord Balfour's comment?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Can Israel get any more evil than this shit?


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbmP-lCfMW0#t=140]IDF soldiers Fires Tear Gas at Palestinian Families Harvesting Olives, Tarqumiya 6.10.2012 - YouTube[/ame]



Tear gassing people harvesting olives!

Fuck you, Israel!  I mean, fuck you!


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > How did the Jews not honor the Mandate.
> ...



Yes, of course.  So, tell me how they did not honor the Mandate.  The land of Palestine was for the Jews, whilst the arabs were given their own lands.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Yes, of course.  So, tell me how they did not honor the Mandate.  The land of Palestine was for the Jews, whilst the arabs were given their own lands.


Balfour said they could create the state of Israel, as long as they didn't disenfranchise the existing non-Jewish population.  Driving over 700,000 of them out of the area with the use of jewish terrorist groups like Irgun, is disenfranchising the existing non-Jewish population.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Can Israel get any more evil than this shit?
> 
> 
> IDF soldiers Fires Tear Gas at Palestinian Families Harvesting Olives, Tarqumiya 6.10.2012 - YouTube
> ...



And tear gas canisters they use to attack and injure and maim and kill Palestinians with is given to them by the US.

The US funds Israeli terrorism in Palestine.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

More proof Zionism is a threat to Judaism.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA5is7IcEqA]'Judaism Yes, Zionism No': Ultra-Orthodox Jews march against Israel - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Funny, when Israeli settlers throw rocks at Palestinian's, 
the IDF just stands around and does nothing.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcOpFZvVOvg#t=70]Terrorist of Havat Maon, finally caught 22.9.2012 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Lipush (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Can Israel get any more evil than this shit?
> 
> 
> IDF soldiers Fires Tear Gas at Palestinian Families Harvesting Olives, Tarqumiya 6.10.2012 - YouTube
> ...



You first, hater.

God bless our troops


----------



## Lipush (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> More proof Zionism is a threat to Judaism.
> 
> 
> 'Judaism Yes, Zionism No': Ultra-Orthodox Jews march against Israel - YouTube



You take Netorei Karta as "proof"??

They're not even 1% of the community, and when the day comes, they'll be the first ones to fight the Arabs to the death and kick them out of Israel.

You bringing them as back up for your claims is laughable!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Lipush said:


> You first, hater.
> 
> God bless our troops


Firing tear gas at people harvesting olives?

Just how evil are you?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Can Israel get any more evil than this shit?
> 
> 
> IDF soldiers Fires Tear Gas at Palestinian Families Harvesting Olives, Tarqumiya 6.10.2012 - YouTube
> ...



Whatever that conversation was about, it looked like it was resolved on both sides in the end.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > More proof Zionism is a threat to Judaism.
> ...



Netorei Karta are a pathetic bunch of idiots, even bowing to Achmadinajad when meeting him.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Whatever that conversation was about, it looked like it was resolved on both sides in the end.


I don't know what the fuck you're talking about, but the video clearly shows an IDF piece of shit, shooting tear gas at people harvesting olives.


----------



## Lipush (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > You first, hater.
> ...



Obviously not enough, since Israelis are still being killed by Palestinian terrorists.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

I guess the Zionists here see the  Prophet Isaiah as a pathetic idiot too,  he was murdered by the Jewish people when he spoke out against the wrongs his own people did.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



You will not be satisfied, your lust for blood, as long as even one Palestinian child still lives. 

That is what Zionism transforms a person into, you!


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever that conversation was about, it looked like it was resolved on both sides in the end.
> ...



You cannot interpret a video if you do not know what is happening and unless you speak Arabic or Hebrew you have no idea what is going on.  The end of the video shows an agreement, so whatever was going on the matter was resolved.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Lipush said:


> Obviously not enough, since Israelis are still being killed by Palestinian terrorists.


Right.  Palestinian's resisting the foreign occupation of their land, are called terrorists.

Israeli troops murdering innocent Palestinian civilians, are merely defending Israel.

You're pretty in the head!

I'll tell you this, after all the shit Zionists have done to the Palestinian's...


> _Total number of Palestinians expelled during Israel's creation (1947-49): Between 750,000 and 1 million.
> 
> Number of Palestinians expelled prior to Israel's declaration of independence on May 14, 1948, and the ensuing war with neighboring Arab states: Between 250,000 and 350,000.
> 
> ...


... Israeli's should be killed!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> You cannot interpret a video if you do not know what is happening and unless you speak Arabic or Hebrew you have no idea what is going on.  The end of the video shows an agreement, so whatever was going on the matter was resolved.


You can clearly see in the video people on one side of the fence picking olives.  Then the IDF comes up in their Humvee and you can clearly see one of the soldiers shooting tear gas at the olive pickers, while one Palestinian is just standing there talking to them!

You fucking excuse every god-damn thing they fucking do no matter how evil the act is. 

Go fuck yourself!  I really mean that!

And fuck your bullshit excuse to!


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > You cannot interpret a video if you do not know what is happening and unless you speak Arabic or Hebrew you have no idea what is going on.  The end of the video shows an agreement, so whatever was going on the matter was resolved.
> ...



You interpret a video how you want it to turn out.  Anyone can see it was amicable at the end.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> You interpret a video how you want it to turn out.  Anyone can see it was amicable at the end.


There's nothing amicable about shooting tear gas at people harvesting olives.

But you're okay with that.  You're also okay with shooting people fishing and farming.

And you wonder why people hate Israeli's?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > You interpret a video how you want it to turn out.  Anyone can see it was amicable at the end.
> ...



You do not know the story.  Without knowledge of what transpired you do not know whether it was Israelis or Arabs harvesting.  You do not know whether they were harvesting on land that was not theirs.  Stop trying to assume things that you do not have any knowledge about.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> You do not know the story.  Without knowledge of what transpired you do not know whether it was Israelis or Arabs harvesting.  You do not know whether they were harvesting on land that was not theirs.  Stop trying to assume things that you do not have any knowledge about.


I don't care if that was Israeli's harvesting olives, you don't shoot tear gas at people farming.

The fact you can't bring yourself to deal with that, shows just how inhuman you are.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > You do not know the story.  Without knowledge of what transpired you do not know whether it was Israelis or Arabs harvesting.  You do not know whether they were harvesting on land that was not theirs.  Stop trying to assume things that you do not have any knowledge about.
> ...



When you know the story you can comment, but as you don't then you cannot.  Stop trying to show Israel in a bad light in every single opportunity you can find.


----------



## Jroc (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



He only knows what his Jew hating we-sites tell him


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Jroc said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Exactly.  A person watching a video in another language, without knowledge of what is happening, can interpret the results any way they choose.  Like the video of "Palestinian farmers" that he posted on another thread yesterday.  This one.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msMjz7XGj7w]Israeli soldiers shooting at farmers in Khuza´a, Gaza Strip 12 12 2012 - YouTube[/ame]

So close to the border fence with Israel it is bound to be a scene of contention.  We don't know that they are farmers, the land doesn't look much like farming land to me, approach the border and the Israelis are bound to fire warning shots.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



The mandate was to assist immigrating Jews in obtaining Palestinian citizenship and join with the existing population in a state with equal rights.

The Jews were pushing for an exclusive Jewish state that would push aside or push out the Christians and Muslims.

The 1939 white paper clarified the purpose of the mandate. The paper specifically stated that there was not to be a Jewish state.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Can Israel get any more evil than this shit?
> 
> 
> IDF soldiers Fires Tear Gas at Palestinian Families Harvesting Olives, Tarqumiya 6.10.2012 - YouTube
> ...



The IDF is lower than whale shit.


----------



## TRFjr (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Obviously not enough, since Israelis are still being killed by Palestinian terrorists.
> ...



first off it was never Palestine land it was always owned by someone else second Israel was rightfully given to the Jews by the united nations and the other parts of Israel was occupied obtained from the spoils of war that Israel wasn't the aggressor 

when you are the aggressor in a war and you lose that war there is consequences just ask Germany and Japan. should we give all the land back to Germany and Japan they had before they lost ww2


----------



## Hollie (Dec 9, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Can Israel get any more evil than this shit?
> ...




Insightful, compelling testimony. Typical for the intellectually stunted YouTube cut and paste cabal.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



The land was given as a Jewish State in the Mandate in 1922.  

Article 6 states:
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, *shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency. referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews, on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.*

Article 80:
Article 80 of the UN Charter, once known unofficially as the Jewish People&#8217;s clause, which preserves intact all the rights granted to Jews under the Mandate for Palestine, *even after the Mandate&#8217;s expiry on May 14-15, 1948*. 
Under this provision of international law (the Charter is an international treaty), *Jewish rights to Palestine and the Land of Israel were not to be altered in any way* unless there had been an intervening trusteeship agreement between the states or parties concerned, which would have converted the Mandate into a trusteeship or trust territory. The only period of time such an agreement could have been concluded under Chapter 12 of the UN Charter was during the three-year period from October 24, 1945, the date the Charter entered into force after appropriate ratifications, until May 14-15, 1948, the date the Mandate expired and the State of Israel was proclaimed. *Since no agreement of this type was made during this relevant three-year period, in which Jewish rights to all of Palestine may conceivably have been altered had Palestine been converted into a trust territory, those Jewish rights that had existed under the Mandate remained in full force and effect, to which the UN is still committed by Article 80 to uphold, or is prohibited from altering.*


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2013)

TRFjr said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Lipush said:
> ...



The UN did not give Israel any land.

The Palestinians never lost a war with Israel.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

The UN never had sovereignty rights in any land in Palestine to give to anyone.


----------



## Jroc (Dec 9, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



They bet on their Arab brothers to "drive the Jews into the sea".... Wrong bet


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Not since these assholes bulldozed it.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgjmYEuuYXQ]Israeli Bulldozers invade and destroy Palestinian land in Gaza - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Olive Harvest 2013 | Rabbis for Human RightsRabbis for Human Rights


Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > You cannot interpret a video if you do not know what is happening and unless you speak Arabic or Hebrew you have no idea what is going on.  The end of the video shows an agreement, so whatever was going on the matter was resolved.
> ...



There is article after article addressing incidents in the olive harvest on Rabbis For Human Rights website. Their organization mobilizes volunteers to be present when olives are harvested, acts designed to minimize Israeli attacks.

Here is the recap of this last season and its many human rights abuses.


Rabbi Yehiel Grenimann, Director of Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, summarizes the 2013 RHR Olive Harvest:

As always, a number of incidents did occur. 

They included:

Delays on farmers: Awarta 

Attacks on the farmers-:Burin,*Mureir, Sinji (including settlers with arms who disrupted the harvest),Yasuf,

Military drills interfering with the harvest: Qusra

Expulsion and denial of access to lands: Kefar Qadum, Jayyous, Kariot, Nazlat*Isa*and Deir Rassoun, Imtan, Azmut

Logging and leveling of lands: Azun,*Kuffor Laqef

Olive theft: Aqraba, Furata, Jit

Arrests: A farmer from Sinjil was arrested

Burnt trees:*Jalud

Vandalized cars: Jalud

Destroyed school: Jalud

Failure to provide sufficient days for harvest: Kariot

Sewage poisoning trees: Al-Janiya

Olive Harvest 2013 | Rabbis for Human RightsRabbis for Human Rights


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 9, 2013)

HUH??? Are you not even aware of UN resolution 181?  Do you think maybe the Palestinians made a hugh mistake by rejecting it & thus making it non binding? 




P F Tinmore said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


----------



## Hollie (Dec 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> The UN never had sovereignty rights in any land in Palestine to give to anyone.



Neither did the Ottoman Turk Crusaders.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2013)

MJB12741 said:


> HUH??? Are you not even aware of UN resolution 181?  Do you think maybe the Palestinians made a hugh mistake by rejecting it & thus making it non binding?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The Palestinians had the right to reject the partition of their land and they did. Consequently the Security Council did not implement the plan. No land was given to Israel.

Resolution 181 was/is a dead issue.

I don't see a mistake.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> When you know the story you can comment, but as you don't then you cannot.


 I know the story.  I saw some IDF prick fire tear gas at people harvesting olives.

It doesn't matter how many bullshit excuses you come up with, it doesn't change what you see in the video.




Sweet_Caroline said:


> Stop trying to show Israel in a bad light in every single opportunity you can find.


Stop trying to put lipstick on a pig.

Israel is putting themselves in a bad light by committing all these atrocities.

And the fact you can't speak out against these purely evil acts, shows just how sick your society is.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

TRFjr said:


> first off it was never Palestine land it was always owned by someone else second Israel was rightfully given to the Jews by the united nations and the other parts of Israel was occupied obtained from the spoils of war that Israel wasn't the aggressor
> 
> when you are the aggressor in a war and you lose that war there is consequences just ask Germany and Japan. should we give all the land back to Germany and Japan they had before they lost ww2


Holding onto land seized in a war has been illegal since the end of WWII.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > When you know the story you can comment, but as you don't then you cannot.
> ...



Again, you should not comment on a story you know nothing about.  It could be some people were stealing others' olives, it could be anything.  The fact you rush headlong into condemnation of the IDF, just as you did with the 'Palestinian farmers' video shows you need to stick to what is obvious, not what you can twist to appear obvious.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Jroc said:


> He only knows what his Jew hating we-sites tell him


People like you, *Hollie *and *Sweet_Caroline*, should be hated.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Again, you should not comment on a story you know nothing about.  It could be some people were stealing others' olives, it could be anything.  The fact you rush headlong into condemnation of the IDF, just as you did with the 'Palestinian farmers' video shows you need to stick to what is obvious, not what you can twist to appear obvious.


Everything you need to see is right there in the videos.

And you're just trying to come up with bullshit excuses, because you're an irresponsible piece of shit.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > He only knows what his Jew hating we-sites tell him
> ...



Why hate a person for their views?


----------



## Indeependent (Dec 9, 2013)

I amazed that all of the oil rich Arab countries don't contribute a penny to entering the Jordanian West Bank from the Jordanian side and building a beautiful nation for their downtrodden brothers.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Why hate a person for their views?


If I hate the Nazis for the way they treated the jews, then I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't hate you for your treatment of the Palestinian's.

Because their "hate" and your "hate" is the same "hate" and I'm sick of it.

There isn't anything the Israeli's could do to the Pals that you would object to.

And by the time 1939 rolled around, average Germans felt the same way about the jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> The UN never had sovereignty rights in any land in Palestine to give to anyone.



That is true. The UN needed the permission of the Palestinians that they did not get.

The UN did not give Israel any land.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Indeependent said:


> I amazed that all of the oil rich Arab countries don't contribute a penny to entering the Jordanian West Bank from the Jordanian side and building a beautiful nation for their downtrodden brothers.



If they can claim aid via taxes from other nations then why should the rich Arab countries give anything.  The Middle East nations do not have our Western mentality.  They have a different outlook on things.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Indeependent said:


> I amazed that all of the oil rich Arab countries don't contribute a penny to entering the Jordanian West Bank from the Jordanian side and building a beautiful nation for their downtrodden brothers.


How the fuck could they do that, when there is over 500 roadblocks and checkpoints restricting the freedom of movement for Palestinian's in the West Bank?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > I amazed that all of the oil rich Arab countries don't contribute a penny to entering the Jordanian West Bank from the Jordanian side and building a beautiful nation for their downtrodden brothers.
> ...



Like those solar panels that Germany gave to a Palestinian village...Has Israel bulldozed those yet?


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > When you know the story you can comment, but as you don't then you cannot.
> ...



Anyone is free to sign up for updates by  email from Rabbis For Human Rights here.

You can read all about each Israeli attack upon olive harvesters as they happen. 

If you are in Israel, you can even volunteer to be at an olive harvest personally and witness all that happens with your own eyes. 


Rabbis for Human RightsJoin our site and get E-Mail Updates | Rabbis for Human Rights


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > I amazed that all of the oil rich Arab countries don't contribute a penny to entering the Jordanian West Bank from the Jordanian side and building a beautiful nation for their downtrodden brothers.
> ...



The latest count there were almost 40, not 500.  Do you just pick numbers out of your hat?


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Checkpoints

"In September 2013, there were 99 fixed checkpoints in the West Bank.*59 are internal checkpoints, located well within the West Bank. These checkpoints include 17 in Area H2 in Hebron, where there are Israeli settlement enclaves. 33 of all internal checkpoints are regularly staffed.*40 of the fixed checkpoints are the last inspection point before entering Israel, although most are located a few kilometers east of the Green Line, or just outside the entrance to Jerusalem. 33 of these checkpoints are staffed regularly. Some have been completely or partially privatized, and several are staffed by armed civilian guards employed by private security companies under supervision of the Crossing Directorate of the Ministry of Defense.In addition, the military erects hundreds of surprise flying checkpoints along West Bank roads."

*Checkpoints, Physical Obstructions, and Forbidden Roads | B'Tselem


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Checkpoints
> 
> "In September 2013, there were 99 fixed checkpoints in the West Bank.*59 are internal checkpoints, located well within the West Bank. These checkpoints include 17 in Area H2 in Hebron, where there are Israeli settlement enclaves. 33 of all internal checkpoints are regularly staffed.*40 of the fixed checkpoints are the last inspection point before entering Israel, although most are located a few kilometers east of the Green Line, or just outside the entrance to Jerusalem. 33 of these checkpoints are staffed regularly. Some have been completely or partially privatized, and several are staffed by armed civilian guards employed by private security companies under supervision of the Crossing Directorate of the Ministry of Defense.In addition, the military erects hundreds of surprise flying checkpoints along West Bank roads."
> 
> *Checkpoints, Physical Obstructions, and Forbidden Roads | B'Tselem



B'Tselem are known to lie and twist.  I would rather take Israel's figures.  After all, Israel administers the checkpoints.

Reality check: The truth behind crossings in Judea and Samaria


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

I think there is something wrong with Rabbis For Human Rights website presently. I have read articles on their site about the olive harvest that are not presently accessible .


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Btselem is an award winning and credible organization.

It is Zionist posters here who it has been proven over and over again both lie and twist the truth.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Checkpoints
> 
> "In September 2013, there were 99 fixed checkpoints in the West Bank.*59 are internal checkpoints, located well within the West Bank. These checkpoints include 17 in Area H2 in Hebron, where there are Israeli settlement enclaves. 33 of all internal checkpoints are regularly staffed.*40 of the fixed checkpoints are the last inspection point before entering Israel, although most are located a few kilometers east of the Green Line, or just outside the entrance to Jerusalem. 33 of these checkpoints are staffed regularly. Some have been completely or partially privatized, and several are staffed by armeud civilian guards employed by private security companies under supervision of the Crossing Directorate of the Ministry of Defense.In addition, the military erects hundreds of surprise flying checkpoints along West Bank roads."
> 
> *Checkpoints, Physical Obstructions, and Forbidden Roads | B'Tselem



So far, that seems to be about the right number to effectively control "Palestinian" Arab terrorists from committing atrocities against Israeli citizens.


----------



## Indeependent (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > I amazed that all of the oil rich Arab countries don't contribute a penny to entering the Jordanian West Bank from the Jordanian side and building a beautiful nation for their downtrodden brothers.
> ...



Let's examine the veracity of this posting.
In virtually every Arab nation, the Arabs are murdering each other based on religious heritage and color of garb.
There are well over 1.2 billion Arabs.

With all of this inter-murdering taking place, the Arabs are apparently terrified of the 4 million Jews living in a relatively tiny geographical area.

Not to mention the fact that I explicitly, and PURPOSELY, detailed entering the Jordanian West Bank via JORDAN.
Of course, Jordan has roadblocks across their entire border to prevent these peace loving "Palestinians" from entering Jordan.
A simple detail that the ideological mind obviously did not detect.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Indeependent said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



What hate filled nonsensical garbage that was!

Is that really the best you can do?


----------



## Indeependent (Dec 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...




There's no Arab Spring?
The Sudanese Moslems are not murdering Christians?
Iran is not lead by a Totalitarian dictators?
Your response is weak.

Stay focused and explain why oil rich Arab nations can't enter the Jordanian West Bank from the Jordanian side and create a West Bank Paradise.
Stay focused.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> Btselem is an award winning and credible organization.
> 
> It is Zionist posters here who it has been proven over and over again both lie and twist the truth.



Pull the other one, it has bells on.  


B'Tselem has come under intense fire for what its critics describe as misrepresenting and distorting facts. 

Early in 2011, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman called for a parliamentary investigation of B'Tselem and other human rights organizations. These groups, he said, "are clearly not concerned with human rights. They spread lies, they slander and incite against the state of Israel and against Israeli soldiers... Clearly these organizations are abetting terrorism and their only objective is to undermine Israel," he said in a speech to fellow members of his right-wing Yisrael Beiteinu ("Israel our home") party.[5]

Critics of B'tselem have challenged the accuracy of its reports. The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) and the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs charged that *B'tselem repeatedly classified Arab combatants and terrorists as civilian casualties*.[51][52][53][54][55] 

NGO Monitor said that B'tselem distorts its data and uses "abusive and demonizing rhetoric designed to elicit political support for Palestinians".[56] 

Caroline B. Glick, deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post and former advisor to Benjamin Netanyahu, pointed to several instances where she alleged *B'tselem had misrepresented Palestinian rioters or terrorists as innocent victims, or where she said B'tselem failed to report when an Arab allegedly changed his testimony about an attack by settlers*.[57][58] 

B'tselem and another human rights group are "radical leftist organizations with documented histories of falsifying and distorting data," charged Glick in an editorial.[57] She charged fellow journalists who covered B'tselem's reports with "professional malpractice... As long as we continue to base our national debates and policies on enemy propaganda, it should surprise no one that Israel finds itself in its current dire predicament."[57]



B'Tselem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Indeependent said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



You are the one who needs to stay focused.

We are discussing Palestine.

Not the Arab Spring.

Not Sudan, it is not part of Palestine. 

Not Iran.

Not Arab nations.

The thread topic is Palestine. 

Jordan is not part of Palestine either.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Wikipedia is nothing more than a Zionist propaganda site.

It has zero credibility.

Not just because its a Zionist propaganda site, but because any person can go on it and edit entries there.

In Israel, schools teach Zionists how to do it. 

My children are prohibited from using it as a source,  even in junior high school, by their schools who deem it to not be a credible source.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 9, 2013)

SherriMunnerlyn said:


> ...
> Wikipedia is nothing more than a Zionist propaganda site.
> 
> It has zero credibility.
> ...


----------



## Sally (Dec 9, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Actually I don't know how she does it.  When my children were teenagers, who would have time for forums when they take up a lot of time?  There were karate classes, bowling league, Little League Baseball Practice, driving my kids to three different houses to visit friends, driving them to the beach and going to the movies with them, helping them with their Algebra and Geometry homework, etc.  Add factor in dusting, polishing laundry, cooking,  grocery shopping, etc.  I certainly would have no time for forums unless I had a full-time housekeeper to do all this stuff for the kids and also take care of the house..


----------



## TRFjr (Dec 9, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



the land of Israel was under British control after ww1 and stayed under their control after ww2 it was bought by the Jews soon after and sanctioned by the UN and reconized as the Jewish state of Israel  the land that the Palestine was occupying was under Syrian and Egypt control when Syria and Egypt attacked Israel and lost they lost some of their territory along Israel's border 

question why wasn't the Palestinian try to win their independents when that land they are occupying was under Syrian control why did they wait till Israel gained control of that land from the spoils of war


----------



## TRFjr (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > first off it was never Palestine land it was always owned by someone else second Israel was rightfully given to the Jews by the united nations and the other parts of Israel was occupied obtained from the spoils of war that Israel wasn't the aggressor
> ...



Only if you was the aggressor of that war Israel was attacked unprovoked 

Also how then did N.Vietnam able to keep all of S. Vietnam and then recognized as a sovereign nation of Vietnam by the UN if they illegally did so


----------



## Alfalfa (Dec 9, 2013)

trfjr said:


> p f tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > trfjr said:
> ...



warning! Incoming from haifa!

BTW - What are you talking about?  Is this what they're teaching impressionable young minds in israel these days?


----------



## Alfalfa (Dec 9, 2013)

TRFjr said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...



Ebonics is not your friend.


----------



## theliq (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



The land of Palestine(which YOU beautifully agreed with) was never Jews Land other wise it would have been called Jewland,during the past 1000 years or so.

No,Palestine was invaded by Terrorist Jews......The Palestinians could never have been given their own land BECAUSE THEY ALREADY OWNED THE LAND,IT WAS/IS CALLED PALESTINE.

Confused Caroline.....just cut the Zionist Bullshit.......we are educated people on this side of the WALL.........The Palestinians are and always are.......They are going NOWHERE but their own land.


----------



## theliq (Dec 9, 2013)

Alfalfa said:


> trfjr said:
> 
> 
> > p f tinmore said:
> ...



.


----------



## theliq (Dec 9, 2013)

TRFjr said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...



Moron


----------



## theliq (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> SherriMunnerlyn said:
> 
> 
> > Btselem is an award winning and credible organization.
> ...



NET AN YAR WHOO? has just been translated into English = BULL SHIT ARTIST


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Pull the other one, it has bells on.
> 
> 
> B'Tselem has come under intense fire for what its critics describe as misrepresenting and distorting facts.
> ...


This is nothing but apartheid Israel criminalizing dissent.

Palestinian's are not terrorists.  Their resistance, is self defense.

Lieberman is a racist piece of shit, who can go fuck himself!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

TRFjr said:


> Only if you was the aggressor of that war Israel was attacked unprovoked
> 
> Also how then did N.Vietnam able to keep all of S. Vietnam and then recognized as a sovereign nation of Vietnam by the UN if they illegally did so


It doesn't matter who started the war, _*conquer by conquest*_ has been illegal since the end of WWII.

BTW, Israel _was_ the aggressor.  They started that war when their tanks rolled into Egypt.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sally said:


> Actually I don't know how she does it.  When my children were teenagers, who would have time for forums when they take up a lot of time?  There were karate classes, bowling league, Little League Baseball Practice, driving my kids to three different houses to visit friends, driving them to the beach and going to the movies with them, helping them with their Algebra and Geometry homework, etc.  Add factor in dusting, polishing laundry, cooking,  grocery shopping, etc.  I certainly would have no time for forums unless I had a full-time housekeeper to do all this stuff for the kids and also take care of the house..


Still trying to hijack threads and change the subject.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sally said:
> 
> 
> > Actually I don't know how she does it.  When my children were teenagers, who would have time for forums when they take up a lot of time?  There were karate classes, bowling league, Little League Baseball Practice, driving my kids to three different houses to visit friends, driving them to the beach and going to the movies with them, helping them with their Algebra and Geometry homework, etc.  Add factor in dusting, polishing laundry, cooking,  grocery shopping, etc.  I certainly would have no time for forums unless I had a full-time housekeeper to do all this stuff for the kids and also take care of the house..
> ...


Don't like it, leave.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> The latest count there were almost 40, not 500.  Do you just pick numbers out of your hat?


No, I research my topic and I am honest with my findings...


> _There are now *580 permanent &#8220;points of closure&#8221;* throughout the West bank, from trenches and other obstacles to manned checkpoints._


...you should try it sometime.


Here's one of those checkpoints, with your Berlin Wall prison in the background.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Don't like it, leave.


I'm not Palestinian, I'm an American.

And I don't run from nothing.

Especially from fuckers like you!


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 9, 2013)

He's all yours, Pony Cav!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> B'Tselem are known to lie and twist.  I would rather take Israel's figures.  After all, Israel administers the checkpoints.


Built on land that isn't Israel's, so they have more of a reason to lie about the facts.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Hollie said:


> So far, that seems to be about the right number to effectively control "Palestinian" Arab terrorists from committing atrocities against Israeli citizens.


Care to comment on the atrocities Israel commits against Palestinian citizens?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Indeependent said:


> Let's examine the veracity of this posting.
> In virtually every Arab nation, the Arabs are murdering each other based on religious heritage and color of garb.
> There are well over 1.2 billion Arabs.
> 
> ...


What you fail to detect, are the over 500 roadblocks and checkpoints "within" the West Bank that makes it impossible to have a stable economy.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Let's examine the veracity of this posting.
> ...


Hell, they don't have enough *LAND* left to have a stable economy.

Certainly not enough contiguous land.

But their little experiment at nationhood was doomed from the start anyway.

Might as well go belly-up sooner rather than later.

This just accelerates an inevitable process.

And squeezes 'em across the border to Jordan and Lebanon sooner.

It's over.

Consolidation and mop-up operations continue...


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hell, they don't have enough *LAND* left to have a stable economy.
> 
> Certainly not enough contiguous land.
> 
> ...


The world wouldn't let Hitler keep Poland and it won't let Israel keep the OPT's.


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Hell, they don't have enough *LAND* left to have a stable economy.
> ...


Keep dreaming, Billy-Boy... keep dreaming...


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Keep dreaming, Billy-Boy... keep dreaming...


I guarantee it.

People who walk around thinking their shit don't stink, always get knocked down in the end.  Always.


----------



## SherriMunnerlyn (Dec 9, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



I have such sweet dreams of the coming fall of Zionism,  you cannot even imagine!


----------



## Sally (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Hell, they don't have enough *LAND* left to have a stable economy.
> ...


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Don't like it, leave.
> ...


Heard it before, clochard.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sally said:


> Who knows what will happen in the future, but many borders were changed since World War One.
> 
> List of national border changes since World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Except that Hitler changed all that.  The world was so sick of what he did to the jews and other country's, that it created international law, the UN and the Nuremberg Principles, to prevent another WWII (and Holocaust) from ever happening again.

That's why we have the UN Charter, which presents the mechanism for solving disputes peacefully; International Humanitarian Law, which protects innocent civilians in times of war; and the Nuremberg Principles, which makes unprovoked aggression against a sovereign nation, the highest crime a nation can commit.

In Israel's case, not only as a member nation are they duty bound to honor the Charter, but showing total contempt and disdain for IHL, is shitting on the memory of all the victims of the Holocaust.


----------



## Sally (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sally said:
> 
> 
> > Who knows what will happen in the future, but many borders were changed since World War One.
> ...



Even after World War II the map was changed.  You and I are not fortune tellers so even if y ou keep babbling on about the UN, we still do not know what will happen in the long run.  Funny how the world keeps quiet about lots of atrocities going on in different places.  How many times do you hear about what is happening in China's occupation of Tibet.  I never seem to catch any news about that so I guess the world is not paying attention.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sally said:


> Even after World War II the map was changed.  You and I are not fortune tellers so even if y ou keep babbling on about the UN, we still do not know what will happen in the long run.  Funny how the world keeps quiet about lots of atrocities going on in different places.  How many times do you hear about what is happening in China's occupation of Tibet.  I never seem to catch any news about that so I guess the world is not paying attention.


If you ever check out the UN website, you can see "all" the resolutions they issue on a regular basis.  As an example, in one month, they might issue over a 100 resolutions.  Only 5 will be on Israel.  The rest will be on all these atrocities you keep referring to.

So no, they don't keep quiet.  And AI is the same way.


----------



## Sally (Dec 9, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sally said:
> 
> 
> > Even after World War II the map was changed.  You and I are not fortune tellers so even if y ou keep babbling on about the UN, we still do not know what will happen in the long run.  Funny how the world keeps quiet about lots of atrocities going on in different places.  How many times do you hear about what is happening in China's occupation of Tibet.  I never seem to catch any news about that so I guess the world is not paying attention.
> ...



As far as the resolutions regarding Israel, even the Secretary General admitted that the UN was anti-Semitic.  However, as I said before, we do not know what will happen in the future.  The world economy can take a big hit and theb everyone will be in trouble.  I don't like to make predictions because I feel I am not qualified to be a  fortune teller.  If I were a fortune teller, I would know which stocks to buy that will go up, up, up.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 9, 2013)

Sally said:


> As far as the resolutions regarding Israel, even the Secretary General admitted that the UN was anti-Semitic.  However, as I said before, we do not know what will happen in the future.  The world economy can take a big hit and theb everyone will be in trouble.  I don't like to make predictions because I feel I am not qualified to be a  fortune teller.  If I were a fortune teller, I would know which stocks to buy that will go up, up, up.


That would be the derivative market.

Hedge fund managers can make upwards of $37,000/hr.

I hate our financial industry more than I hate Israel.

I hate Bear Stearns, AIG and Goldman Sachs, more than I hate Netanyahu. 

Don't get me started on those fuckers!


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 10, 2013)

TRFjr said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...



Go back to school.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 10, 2013)

TRFjr said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...



By whom?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 10, 2013)

Sally said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Sally said:
> ...



Just heard a discussion about that on the radio a couple days ago.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 10, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > The latest count there were almost 40, not 500.  Do you just pick numbers out of your hat?
> ...



I showed you there were 40 checkpoints, not 500 as you said and *even your own link states 40 checkpoints.  *


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Dec 10, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Jordan, goldfish.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 10, 2013)

P F Tinmore said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Obviously, such a direct and obvious question leaves you unable to respond.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 10, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> I showed you there were 40 checkpoints, not 500 as you said and *even your own link states 40 checkpoints.  *


Are you on crack?

It said 580 points of closure.


----------

