# Palestinians Reject Two State Solution



## MJB12741 (Dec 6, 2016)

For Palestinians it's all or nothing.  So nothing it shall be.


Maybe Palestinians don’t want two states


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Dec 6, 2016)

The Arabs who started calling themselves "Palestinian" a few decades back for political purposes have never wanted a separate state.  They could have had one at just about any point in time over the last 70 years if A -- they were an actual, distinct people and B -- actually wanted a state.


----------



## fanger (Dec 6, 2016)

An opinion piece written By Jennifer Rubin December 17, 2013


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

Dogmaphobe said:


> The Arabs who started calling themselves "Palestinian" a few decades back for political purposes have never wanted a separate state.  They could have had one at just about any point in time over the last 70 years if A -- they were an actual, distinct people and B -- actually wanted a state.



The Palestinians were Palestinians when the Zionists called the area Palestine at the first Zionist Conference in Basel at least in the late 1800s.

The Palestinians sought independence as a people and declared such in correspondence with the British Colonial Office in 1921-1922. You are ignorant of the facts.


*"PALESTINE.*
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB
DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION.



No. 1.
*The Palestine Arab Delegation to the Secretary of State for the Colonies.*




​HOTEL CECIL,
London, W.C.,
_February 21st, _1922.
Sir,
We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab People of Palestine......Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, *no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable."

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unis...48a7e5584ee1403485256cd8006c3fbe?OpenDocument*


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 6, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> For Palestinians it's all or nothing.  So nothing it shall be.
> Maybe Palestinians don’t want two states


*FIRST:* It's written by the Washington Post, which is inside D.C./Tel Aviv's back pocket.
*SECOND:* Without becoming a member I cannot access the whole article by way of your link.
*THIRD:* Unless I (we) are provided with the whole "deal" (the fine print, etc.) the Palestinian nub cannot be evaluated.
*FOURTH:* Therefore your (and the Washington Post's) over-simplified sum-up, _"For Palestinians it's all or nothing"_ is probably a lie.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

MJ is not he sharpest knife in the drawer, he has posted that there are Muslim Archbishops. He probably never read the article himself.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 6, 2016)

fanger said:


> An opinion piece written By Jennifer Rubin December 17, 2013


You mean that she might be biased? My oh my! Bad girl!


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Dec 6, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > The Arabs who started calling themselves "Palestinian" a few decades back for political purposes have never wanted a separate state.  They could have had one at just about any point in time over the last 70 years if A -- they were an actual, distinct people and B -- actually wanted a state.
> ...




So, you think your posting of some article referring to them simply as Arabs as I stated  somehow proves they identified as "Palestinian".

 I realized you were stupid, Monte, but not THAT stupid.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 6, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJ is not he sharpest knife in the drawer, he has posted that there are Muslim Archbishops. He probably never read the article himself.


That's the impression I get, yes.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

Dogmaphobe said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



They refer to themselves as the "People of Palestine" you moron.


----------



## fanger (Dec 6, 2016)

Mr. Churchill has derived the impression from his interviews with your Delegation that it is not so much the policy itself, as defined in the preceding paragraph, that arouses misgiving, as the unfounded apprehension that the policy will not in practice follow the lines indicated. However this may be, he fully realises that the non-Jewish population of Palestine are entitled to claim from the Mandatory not only assurances but adequate safeguards that the establishment of the National Home, and the consequent Jewish immigration, shall not be conducted in such a manner as to prejudice their civil or religious rights.
https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unis...48a7e5584ee1403485256cd8006c3fbe?OpenDocument

The Palestinian's got Jewed


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 6, 2016)

montelatici said:


> They refer to themselves as the "People of Palestine" you moron.



Yeah, if you didn't know this yet, Monti is much more educated therefore much smarter than anyone else on this board. Just wait for him to tell us.  Again.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

teddyearp said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > They refer to themselves as the "People of Palestine" you moron.
> ...



Thanks for the acknowledgement, but when you make absurd assertions, it isn't too difficult to make you look like a fool.  Maybe you should read the source material before you respond in the future.  So, your false assertion that there were no Palestinians until Arafat has been debunked, once and for all.  At least on this forum.  God knows the number of sites you parrot the Zionist propaganda on.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 6, 2016)

montelatici said:


> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


You're still befuddled by terms and definitions. "Pal'istanians" as a national identity was an invention of Arafat in the late 1960's. 

You are among a few others who seem to believe that your mythical "country of Pal'istan" existed at some time in the past. 

You understand that Disneyland (like Pal'istan) is not a country, right?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 6, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > teddyearp said:
> ...


The Palestinians legally became Palestinians in 1924.

You should read up before you post Israeli talking points.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 6, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Funny, funny, funny!  So then if I refer to myself & my family as "people of Palestine", does that make me a Palestinian?  Seriously Monte, you are a blast.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > teddyearp said:
> ...



No one takes you seriously. Posting Zionist propaganda debunked long ago and in this forum is why you are not taken seriously.  The Palestinian national identify was re-established de facto when the representatives of the Christian and Muslim inhabitants declared themselves representatives of the People of Palestine in correspondence with the British Colonial Office in 1922. Of course, the people inhabiting the Roman province of Palaestina were known as Palaestinorum (Palestinian in Latin) 2,000 years ago as well.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 6, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Okay Monte.  Lets have some fun.  Everyone who takes Monte seriously please identify yourself.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Ahh, the Muslim Archbishop guy wants to be taken seriously. Heh, heh.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 6, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...





MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



HELLO!  ANYBODY HOME?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



I see you are frantic to receive moral support, you little coward. How can anyone support a dummy that thinks Archbishops are Muslims?


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 6, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...



Eh Monte.  I didn't say that. You just didn't get it how the Greek Orthodox church firing the Palestinian archbishop was bad news for Palestinians.  Get it yet?


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 6, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Golly gee.  Why is it that so far not one person has come forward to take Monte seriously?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...



Nice try Mr. Muslim Archbishop, I'm not the only one that caught your dimwitted posts. 

Let's review one of your posts, the one you started as a thread and then abandoned. 

Palestinian Archbishop Fired by Greek Orthodox Christians


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 6, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


----------



## montelatici (Dec 6, 2016)

Speechless. LOL


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 6, 2016)

Hollie said:


> You're still befuddled by terms and definitions. "Pal'istanians" as a national identity was an invention of Arafat in the late 1960's.
> 
> You are among a few others who seem to believe that your mythical "country of Pal'istan" existed at some time in the past.
> 
> You understand that Disneyland (like Pal'istan) is not a country, right?


You are not sure if the term "American" refers to the Indians (not the Asian ones), anyone residing upon the North and South American continent, or a default term plucked from the assholes of befuddled dreamers because "United Statesian" is too difficult to pronounce. Yet you still call yourself that: American. Despite the confusion of your own national identity, you think that you can draw a straight line between the start and finish of a labyrinth when it comes to Palestine/Palestinian. You failed.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> No one takes you seriously. Posting Zionist propaganda debunked long ago and in this forum is why you are not taken seriously.  The Palestinian national identify was re-established de facto when the representatives of the Christian and Muslim inhabitants declared themselves representatives of the People of Palestine in correspondence with the British Colonial Office in 1922. Of course, the people inhabiting the Roman province of Palaestina were known as Palaestinorum (Palestinian in Latin) 2,000 years ago as well.


And as a side-note: When did the population become "Israelis"? "South Sudanese"? "Congolese"?" Burkina Fasoans"? When did Hawaiis become "Americans"? The people of Eupen "Belgians"? Shall I continue? What's in a name? We know who the Palestinians are, right? We know where Palestine was ..... and is - no, maybe not. We do know where it ought to be according international law. Israel is in breach of that law.


----------



## Onyx (Dec 7, 2016)

Identity is a social construction. If Palestinians want to exist, then they exist.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> We know where Palestine was ..... and is - no, maybe not. We do know where it ought to be according international law. Israel is in breach of that law.



We know where it ought to be according to international law?  Well, this is news.  Tell me, where is the legal international boundary between Israel and "Palestine"?  What treaty or legal instrument put that boundary in place?  And where, exactly, is Israel breaching that boundary?


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha,  et al,

If the issue of "borders" are brought to a forced conclusion, then I believe that the International Community will definitely side with the Arab Palestinians.



Shusha said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > We know where Palestine was ..... and is - no, maybe not. We do know where it ought to be according international law. Israel is in breach of that law.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

There is no more of a complicated issue than this.  The all the parties to the conflict have allowed this to drag-on much too long. 

I would hate to speculate, as there are so many aspects of the question to be considered.  

I think that the Arab Palestinians themselves are an obstacle to any serious discussions.   I'm of the opinion and concerned that the Arab Palestinians have no intention to compromise on any issue.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > We know where Palestine was ..... and is - no, maybe not. We do know where it ought to be according international law. Israel is in breach of that law.
> ...


The borders for Israel and Palestine are mentioned in the 1949 UN Armistice Agreements. Now the UN cannot define or change borders but they can reference existing borders. So here are the borders as of after the end of the 1948 war.

The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949
The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949
The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949
The Avalon Project : Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949

Notice that there is no border between Israel and Palestine. That continues to today.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Shusha,  et al,
> 
> If the issue of "borders" are brought to a forced conclusion, then I believe that the International Community will definitely side with the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> ...



The Jews have never had any intention of compromising.  The native inhabitants of Palestine, who under Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations were to tutored towards independence and self-determination by the Mandatory, were supplanted by Europeans transferred to Palestine who were installed as rulers over the native inhabitants.  None of your bullshit changes this basic fact.


----------



## SAYIT (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You're still befuddled by terms and definitions. "Pal'istanians" as a national identity was an invention of Arafat in the late 1960's. You are among a few others who seem to believe that your mythical "country of Pal'istan" existed at some time in the past. You understand that Disneyland (like Pal'istan) is not a country, right?
> ...



And some of them - Jews, Muslims and Christians - became Israelis in May, 1948. Evidently your "knowledge" is extremely limited.

BYW ... those who became Israelis in 1948 (or their progeny) continue to be CITIZENS of Israel to this day.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

This is so misrepresentative of the facts.



P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > GLASNOST said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

There were no Armistice Agreements with Palestine, because there was no party to the conflict called "Palestine."  The Palestine in question at the in the 1948/49 timeframe was that defined by the Palestine Order in Council, the territory to which the former Mandate applied.  

•  In 1949, the Armistice with Egypt laid down the Armistice Line which was:

√  By Article V(2) stated:   The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
√  By Article XII(2)... shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, ...
•  The Peace Treaty between the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Government of the State of Israel,  26 March 1979, supersedes the Armistice Agreement and establishes "the permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, 1 without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip."​•  In 1949, the Armistice with Jordan laid down the Armistice Line which was:

√   By Article VI(9) stated:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.
√   By Article XII(2) ... "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved" ...
•   The Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty, 26 October 1994, supersedes the Armistice Agreement and establishes that the boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognized international boundary between Jordan and Israel, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967; without the mention of Palestine in any facet.​•  There is no current treaty between Lebanon and Israel.  The International Boundary, currently monitored by the UNIFIL along the 2015 Blue Line was last confirmed in a Letter dated 9 June 2000 from the President of Lebanon addressed to the Secretary-General; after a border-crossing incident.

√  Article III(1) states:  The resolution and the report, as well as the historical records and the various documents and maps, including those in the possession of the United Nations, confirm unequivocally that there are between Lebanon and Israel “internationally recognized boundaries” that have never been in dispute between the two countries. Indeed, the descriptive delimitation of these boundaries completed in 1923 was meticulously retraced in 1949, under the supervision of the United Nations and its observers, from boundary pillar 1 to boundary pillar 38 by way of all those in between.​The boundary set along the Syrian Frontier is set by the Annexation authority of the Knesset.  This is a separate issue.  

Whether we talk about the 1988 Palestinian Declaration of Independence, of some earlier alleged Palestinian sovereignty, the ground truth is set out above.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> The Jews have never had any intention of compromising.


I don't like your tone or your choice of words. But I agree with your point, a point that ought to be obvious to ANYONE who's actually done some reading about the facts and details of the initial creation (from Day One) of the creation of Israel.



montelatici said:


> The native inhabitants of Palestine, who under Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations were to tutored towards independence and self-determination by the Mandatory, were supplanted by Europeans transferred to Palestine who were installed as rulers over the native inhabitants.  None of your bullshit changes this basic fact.


Well said! Bravo!


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > The Jews have never had any intention of compromising.
> ...



I am not sure how the tone or the choice of words could be different to communicate the thought. If it is the word "Jew", let me explain. I have tried calling the people that invaded Palestine from Europe "Europeans", but I was criticized, notwithstanding the fact that they were Europeans.  If I call them Israelis or Israeli Jews, the former would not  include the people that invaded Palestine pre-Israel and the latter would include non-Jewish Israelis who are not to blame at all.  It's a dilemma, so I have settled for the word Jew to describe the people in question.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


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



"Native inhabitants" --- were Jews.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


The word you should be looking for is ..... *Zionist*.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> This is so misrepresentative of the facts.
> 
> ...



Israel declares its borders. 





https://trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/pdf/12.pdf


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 7, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > GLASNOST said:
> ...


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 7, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > GLASNOST said:
> ...



How do ya like that.  And I never even knew Zionism began with Solomon's Temple.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



That nonsense was debunked long ago, before the arrival of the Europeans there were a handful of Arab Jews in Palestine and they were relative newcomers from other parts of the Ottoman Empire. 

*"30 July 1921*

*AN INTERIM REPORT*
*ON THE*
*CIVIL ADMINISTRATION*
*OF*

*PALESTINE,*

*during the period*
*1st JULY, 1920--30th JUNE, 1921.*


*AN INTERIM REPORT*
*ON THE*
*CIVIL ADMINISTRATION*
*OF*
*PALESTINE.*

*I.--THE CONDITION OF PALESTINE AFTER THE WAR.*

There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people, a population much less than that of the province of Gallilee alone in the time of Christ.* (*_See_ Sir George Adam Smith "Historical Geography of the Holy Land", Chap. 20.) Of these 235,000 live in the larger towns, 465,000 in the smaller towns and villages. Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church, and speaking Arabic. The minority are members of the Latin or of the Uniate Greek Catholic Church, or--a small number--are Protestants.

The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years*. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews."*
Mandate for Palestine - Interim report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations/Balfour Declaration text (30 July 1921)

We even have documentary film from the late 1800s to debunk your propaganda, Mr. Muslim Archbishop.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



You thought that Archbishops were Muslims, so whatever you say should be taken with a grain of salt.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > The word you should be looking for is ..... *Zionist*.
> ...


Are you only feigning ignorance or making absurd conclusions based upon true stupidity?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > GLASNOST said:
> ...



I think the latter.  He insisted that a Greek Orthodox Archbishop was a Muslim.  He even started a thread to that effect.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> He insisted that a Greek Orthodox Archbishop was a Muslim.  He even started a thread to that effect.


No! Really?


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > GLASNOST said:
> ...



Archbishops are Muslims?  I didn't know that.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > He insisted that a Greek Orthodox Archbishop was a Muslim.  He even started a thread to that effect.
> ...



The funny thing is that he keeps trying to deny it, as he did above,  and then I post the link to thread he started and his assertion regarding Muslim Archbishops is there in black and white. He is so dimwitted he keeps doing the same thing over and over and expects a different result, i.e. one that doesn't humiliate him.  Or is that the definition of insanity? 

Here is the link to the thread he started, note that he claims Muslims can't get along with Christians when the article is about a Christian Archbishop being fired by his superior in the Greek Orthodox Church.

Palestinian Archbishop Fired by Greek Orthodox Christians


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


Oh boy, what fun.  Yep, the Archbishop was indeed a Palestinian who supported Palestinians against their church.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

But you indicated it was a Muslim versus Christian dynamic, not between Christians. 

You wrote:

_"It is truly sad that Muslim Palestinians cannot even get along with fellow Christian Palestinians." 
_
It's there in black and white in thread linked below, your thread. LOL

Palestinian Archbishop Fired by Greek Orthodox Christians

And, what in the heck do you mean when you write:

" the Archbishop was indeed a Palestinian who supported Palestinians against their church."

How can one "support Palestinians against their church". 

You keep digging deeper and deeper moron.

Just give it up.  You continue to humiliate yourself by drawing attention to your stupidity.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici, P F Tinmore,  et al,

We have to remember that this Memo was written before the Coordinated attack by Arab League Forces _(external interference)_.

Before the coordinated attack, the Israelis use the the territory outlined for the Jewish State in the Partition Plan.



montelatici said:


> Israel declares its borders.


*(COMMENT)*

This document _(interestingly enough as it is)_ does not alter the timeline; and does not really contribute anything we did not already know.  The Arab-Israeli Conflict up to the Armistice Agreements expanded the area under the control and direct influence of Jewish Forces.

What does it change?  Nothing...

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> He is so dimwitted he keeps doing the same thing over and over and expects a different result ...


Yeah. When I was a kid, my parents wanted some down-time to produce more children so they sent me to the movie everyday. "Old Yeller" was playing and I must have seen it 10 times! But no matter how many times I saw it I kept on hoping that they wouldn't shoot the dog at the end ..... "this time".




montelatici said:


> The funny thing is that he keeps trying to deny it, as he did above,  and then I post the link to thread he started and his assertion regarding Muslim Archbishops is there in black and white.


Someone once said, "A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing". That's true. Your friend must have heard that Turkey is a predominantly Moslem nation. That's all he needed to know to assume (I mean to KNOW!) that the Greek Orthodox archbishop is a Moslem.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> Yep, the Archbishop was indeed a Palestinian .......


You're American,eh? So what's your real name .... "Dances with sheep"? "Runs on one leg"? "Rain in the ass"? I guess you must be a Sun Dancer or a Corn Dancer, huh?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici, P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> We have to remember that this Memo was written before the Coordinated attack by Arab League Forces _(external interference)_.
> 
> ...



It is the only officially declared boundary submitted in the formal request to the United States for recognition by Israel.  Truman refused to recognize Israel without the inclusion of the stated border of the state of Israel. This can be discerned from Clifford Clark's memoirs. It changes everything in terms of the bovine manure you spread in the forum. Your assertion that there was no officially declared border is false, for one thing.

The humanitarian intervention on the part of the Arab League, in its attempt to prevent Jewish war crimes against the Christian and Muslim native inhabitants of Palestine is irrelevant, it does not modify the officially declared border.  

For the purposes of the Palestinian people, who were not participants in the matters that evoked the armistice agreements, it changes everything.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore, montelatici, et al,

We have to remember that this Memo was written before the Coordinated attack by Arab League Forces _(external interference)_.

Before the coordinated attack, the Israelis use the the territory outlined for the Jewish State in the Partition Plan.



montelatici said:


> Israel declares its borders.


*(COMMENT)*

This document _(interestingly enough as it is)_ does not alter the timeline; and does not really contribute anything we did not already know.  The Arab-Israeli Conflict up to the Armistice Agreements expanded the area under the control and direct influence of Jewish Forces.

What does it change?  Nothing...

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Shusha,  et al,
> 
> If the issue of "borders" are brought to a forced conclusion, then I believe that the International Community will definitely side with the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> ...



We agree.  One of the most unfortunate aspects of the conflict is the international acceptance of the false idea of "the 1967 border".  Its is one of the areas where Arab Palestinian lack of compromise extends the conflict needlessly.  Borders would be fairly easy to arrange if one let go of that notion and just drew a border based primarily (but not entirely) on residence of Arabs and Jews.

Admitedly, this is getting harder and harder to manage, especially with the Jerusalem to Jericho corridor which splits the potential Palestine in half.  

But I think that there is little chance of a forced conclusion at this juncture.  Israel has considerable control over events, a relatively good relationship with Jordan, Egypt and a few other ME States, and a growing and troublesome common enemy with the extremist Muslim groups.  In the end, Israel is not willing to incorporate so many hostiles into their nation, so a two state solution is inevitable unless Jordan and Egypt takes them along with some territory.  

It all depends on where the Palestinians head when Abbas passes.  But that is not looking especially promising for the Palestinians.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

There was no attack by the Arab League.  Your continue to propagate this propaganda. The Arab League entered Palestine to restore order and protect the native inhabitants of Palestine.  The aggressors were the hostile Jews as indicated below in the Arab League declaration to the UN and as confirmed by recently declassified British intelligence reports.

*Cablegram from the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States to the Secretary-General of the United Nations (1948)*

"On the occasion of the intervention of Arab States in Palestine to restore law and order and to prevent disturbances prevailing in Palestine from spreading into their territories and to check further bloodshed, I have the honour to request your Excellency to bring following statement before General Assembly and Security Council........Peace and order have been completely upset in Palestine, and, in consequence of Jewish aggression, approximately over a quarter of a million of the Arab population have been compelled to leave their homes and emigrate to neighbouring Arab countries. The prevailing events in Palestine exposed the concealed aggressive intentions of the Zionists and their imperialistic motives, as clearly shown in their acts committed upon those peaceful Arabs and villagers of Deer Yasheen, Tiberias, and other places, as well as by their encroachment upon the building and bodies of the inviolable consular codes, manifested by their attack upon the Consulate in Jerusalem.................................*The Arab States recognize that the independence and sovereignty of Palestine which was so far subject to the British Mandate has now, with the termination of the Mandate, become established in fact, and maintain that the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration in Palestine for the discharge of all governmental functions without any external interference. *As soon as that stage is reached the intervention of the Arab States, which is confined to the restoration of peace and establishment of law and order, shall be put an end to, and the sovereign State of Palestine will be competent in co-operation with the other States members of the Arab League, to take every step for the promotion of the welfare and security of its peoples and territory.

Arab League Declaration on the intervention in Palestine, 15 May 1948 | Religion :: Science :: Peace


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> The native inhabitants of Palestine.....



were the Jews, of course.  The pre-conquest culture.  They did receive tutelage, to great success.  The Arab Palestinians did not receive tutelage because they refused to co-operate with the Mandate and refused to recognize the point of the Mandate -- which was to bring ALL the native inhabitants to self-government.  It was the Arab Palestinians who rejected the tutelage, not the other way around.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > The native inhabitants of Palestine.....
> ...



No, the Jews were native and inhabitants of Europe. The Christians and Muslims were the native  inhabitants of Palestine.  Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations states that the "inhabitants" of the former Turkish territories were to receive tutelage, not inhabitants of Europe. The British refused to provide tutelage to the Christians and Muslims.  I have provided all the links to the official correspondence that shows that while the British were negotiating with the Zionist Organization, the British Colonial Office refused to work with the Christian and Muslim leadership.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> No, the Jews were native and inhabitants of Europe. The Christians and Muslims were the native  inhabitants of Palestine.  Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations states that the "inhabitants" of the former Turkish territories were to receive tutelage, not inhabitants of Europe. The British refused to provide tutelage to the Christians and Muslims.  I have provided all the links to the official correspondence that shows that while the British were negotiating with the Zionist Organization, the British Colonial Office refused to work with the Christian and Muslim leadership.



You obviously haven't read your own links since the substance of the letters most clearly demonstrate that the Arab delegation refused to co-operate with the Mandate and the purpose of the Mandate, for example:

_the People of Palestine cannot accept the creation of a National Home for the Jewish People in Palestine as a basis for negotiation_

It is also very clear in the correspondence that the British would have been only too happy to accommodate the Arab delegation had they accepted the restrictions under which the British had been placed to include a Jewish National Homeland in Palestine.

Then, as now, its the rejection of the principle of self-determination and self-government for BOTH peoples that is the stumbling block.  The British then and Israel now will not accept a situation which leads to the destruction of the Jewish National Homeland. 

 And it is quite shocking how similar the arguments of the Arab Delegation a hundred years ago are to the demands of the Arab Palestinians and Team Palestine now.



And the Jewish people, the Jewish culture and Jewish sovereignty originated in Israel, Judea and Samaria thousands of years ago.  Pre-conquest.  Pre-Arab-conquest.  Making them the indigenous peoples.  The Diaspora does not change that fact in any way.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

No, you haven't read the letters.  The Christians and Muslims, rightfully, notwithstanding the British excuses, insisted that they be afforded the rights guaranteed by Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations as were all other inhabitants of the former Turkish territories. To avoid negotiating with the representatives of the People of Palestine, the British insisted that the representatives did not have standing. And, the British continued the charade until 1948.  To wit:

"...he (Churchill) is not in a position to negotiate officially with you or with any other body which claims to represent the whole or, part of the people of Palestine..."

UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)

He only negotiated with the Zionist Organization.

Furthermore, the People of Palestine did not believe that their rights would be protected as promised by Churchill referring to the second part of the Balfour Declaration where it states that the rights of the native inhabitants would be protected.  They were prescient. The British had no intention of protecting the rights of the native inhabitants and were just delaying until they could flood more Jews into Palestine that could ethnically cleanse enough of the land to establish a Jewish state whose people would rule over the few remaining non-Jews. Who would never achieve self-determination.

"The point to which Mr. Churchill has endeavoured to address himself, in his communications with your Delegation, is the provision of *adequate safeguards for the fulfilment of the second part of the Declaration. *He cannot but express his disappointment that the Delegation should decline to co-operate with him in seeking a practical solution of this important question.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

The European Jews were European.  The native Christians and Muslims inhabitants of Palestine are the indigenous people who converted to Christianity and Islam over the centuries.  Many of their ancestors, if not a plurality, practiced Judaism.  They have a much closer relationship to the land than Europeans of whatever religion.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2016)

It was thousands of years ago when Ghengis Khan invaded the area called Palestine. None of those kids "look" Chinese / Mongolian.

So once again, you refute your own argument with your cutting and pasting.


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Thanks for the acknowledgement, but when you make absurd assertions, it isn't too difficult to make you look like a fool.  Maybe you should read the source material before you respond in the future.  So, your false assertion that there were no Palestinians until Arafat has been debunked, once and for all.  At least on this forum.  God knows the number of sites you parrot the Zionist propaganda on.



Hmm.  How to reply? The intention of my post was to warn the newcomers to some of your same old drivel. In your first sentence you thank me, then quickly say I am making absurd assertions. So, does that mean you are not actually as educated as you have claimed over and over again? Then in your third sentence you assert things that my post did not contain at all. Your fifth sentence asks how many other sites I 'parrot' on, another assertion, no, assumption. I do not 'parrot' anything, and this is the only site I post my political views of the I/P conflict upon.

So, you know what they say about assuming, right? Who's the fool now?


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Nice try Mr. Muslim Archbishop, I'm not the only one that caught your dimwitted posts.
> 
> Let's review one of your posts, the one you started as a thread and then abandoned.
> 
> Palestinian Archbishop Fired by Greek Orthodox Christians



While I agree that sometimes MJB does makes some weird posts, I can not for the life of me see how you can call him a Muslim Archbishop from this statement and links.

But this is what amuses us about you.  You will take anything you can and twist it, spin it, tell it enough times to make it into a so called 'truth' to support your narrative.


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Here is the link to the thread he started, note that he claims Muslims can't get along with Christians when the article is about a Christian Archbishop being fired by his superior in the Greek Orthodox Church.
> 
> Palestinian Archbishop Fired by Greek Orthodox Christians



Again, I still call that quite a stretch to assert that MJB thinks that there are Muslim Archbishops.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> There were no Armistice Agreements with Palestine, because, blah, blah, blah


You missed the point of my post.


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> The European Jews were European.  The native Christians and Muslims inhabitants of Palestine are the indigenous people who converted to Christianity and Islam over the centuries.  Many of their ancestors, if not a plurality, practiced Judaism.  They have a much closer relationship to the land than Europeans of whatever religion.



Monti, please provide proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that the child on the left actually is from and/or lives in Israel.

Because I have been there and most of the Jews there look a bit more like the child on the right, especially the children.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

teddyearp said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Here is the link to the thread he started, note that he claims Muslims can't get along with Christians when the article is about a Christian Archbishop being fired by his superior in the Greek Orthodox Church.
> ...



You are hilarious. What does his post say about the article, it says:

"It is truly sad that Muslim Palestinians cannot even get along with fellow Christian Palestinians."

How would the article lead him to post that?

Talk about dumb and dumber. LOL


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici,  et al,

Let us start by remembering that the fundamental purposes of the UN as an organization is to maintain international peace and security.    The UN tries to act in the furtherance of prevention and removal of threats to the peace.   This is the very meaning behind Chapter I of the UN Charter with the intent to suppress acts of aggression and the outbreak of hostilities.



montelatici said:


> *Cablegram from the Secretary-General *(SG)* of the League of Arab States *(LAS)* to the Secretary-General of the United Nations (1948)*
> 
> On the occasion of the intervention of Arab States in Palestine to restore law and order and to prevent disturbances prevailing in Palestine from spreading into their territories and to check further bloodshed, I have the honour to request your Excellency to bring following statement before General Assembly and Security Council.​
> .......*The Arab States recognize that the independence and sovereignty of Palestine which was so far subject to the British Mandate has now, with the termination of the Mandate, become established in fact, and maintain that the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration in Palestine for the discharge of all governmental functions without any external interference. *​
> Arab League Declaration on the intervention in Palestine, 15 May 1948 | Religion :: Science :: Peace


*(COMMENT)*

The first dynamic to International Diplomacy at the policy level is the concept for a "Just War."  Technically, today, the FIRST USE of armed force *by a State* in contravention of the Charter I Article 2(4) shall constitute _*prima facie*_ evidence of an act of aggression.  

The excerpt of the Cablegram (To SG - From LAS) is essentially a confession (_*prima facie*_ evidence) to the act of FIRST USE.  Technically, there were at least seven counts.  Today, it would be Seven Counts in contravention of Chapter I/UN Charter --- and --- Seven Count in violation of Rome Statue - Article 8 _bis_ Crime of aggression.  However, in the 1948 invasion by LAS Armed Forces against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of Israel. 

•  The remarkable thing here is the fact that it must be a State(s) against State(s) - remembering that there was no State of Palestine at that time - AND - that it is an "invasion" OR "attack" against a sovereignty.​The "Just War" Defense given by the LAS is that:

•  Jewish aggression was the proximate cause of Peace and order having been completely upset in Palestine.
•  To prevent Jewish Forces from committing excessive (war crimes like) acts upon those peaceful Arabs and villagers of Deer Yasheen, Tiberias, and other places.
•  That the sovereignty and independence of the Jewish State was improperly establish and that only the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration.​The underlying opposition against the LAS justification for aggression rests with:

•  Chapter I is interpreted to include the concept that no consideration of whatever may be granted to the LAS in the nature of the intervention; whether political, economic, military or otherwise.  None may serve as a justification for aggression.
•  Chapter VII provides for the Jewish State to initiate defensive actions with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace and Acts of Aggression by the FIRST USE of armed force against Israeli declared sovereignty.​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 7, 2016)

WHAT WAS THE POINT?



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > There were no Armistice Agreements with Palestine, because, blah, blah, blah
> ...


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> There was no attack by the Arab League.  Your continue to propagate this propaganda. The Arab League entered Palestine to restore order and protect the native inhabitants of Palestine.  The aggressors were the hostile Jews as indicated below in the Arab League declaration to the UN and as confirmed by recently declassified British intelligence reports.
> 
> *Cablegram from the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States to the Secretary-General of the United Nations (1948)*
> 
> ...



The Arab league entered Palestine to restore order & protect the native Jews of Palestine???  Don't that beat all?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

The Zionists that invaded Palestine and displaced the native Christians and Muslims were from Europe.  That's all there is to know.  They were not inhabitants of Palestine as Article 22 of the LON Covenant stated were to receive tutelage to be able to become an independent state.  Furthermore, European Jews are European genitically:

*Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European*

Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European

But, more to the point.  When the Arabs, who were the officers and non-commissioned officers, with thousands of convert foot soldiers invaded Palestine and conquered Jerusalem, the inhabitants were Christians, as was required by the Romans/Byzantines after Christianity became the state religion.  Prior to Constantine's conversion and the adoption of Christianity as the state religion, the Romans only regularly persecuted members of one religion, Christianity.  There are many hypotheses as to why they tolerated other religions such as the Persian cult of Mithraism, the Egyptian cult of Isis, Neoplatonism and Judaism, for example.  One is that only the Christians refused to call the Emperor lord, another is that the Christians were suspected of cannibalism (the Eucharist was thought to be a literal eating of the body and blood of Christ).  So the Christians of Palestine were converts to Christianity whose parent and grand parents practiced a variety of religions, including Judaism.

Do you think that the Christian inhabitants of Palestine disappeared and somehow were replaced by Muslims after the Arab conquest?  No, the Christians of Palestine remained Christian and were the majority of the people in Palestine for centuries after the conquest, and only slowly converted to Islam as it became increasingly socially and economically beneficial to adopt the religion of the ruling class.  

The native Muslims and Christians of Palestine are the descendants of these people and they have a much stronger tie to the land than Zionists that lived on another continent.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > There was no attack by the Arab League.  Your continue to propagate this propaganda. The Arab League entered Palestine to restore order and protect the native inhabitants of Palestine.  The aggressors were the hostile Jews as indicated below in the Arab League declaration to the UN and as confirmed by recently declassified British intelligence reports.
> ...



You do have a reading comprehension problem too, I see. LOL


----------



## member (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



*"The funny thing is that he keeps trying to deny it, as he did above,  and then I post the link to thread he started and his assertion regarding Muslim Archbishops is there in black and white. He is so dimwitted he keeps doing the same thing over and over and expects a different result, i.e. one that doesn't humiliate him.  Or is that the definition of insanity?"


*






oh, no, he knows _'how_' it's coming across....




 





​


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> • There is no current treaty between Lebanon and Israel. The International Boundary, currently monitored by the UNIFIL along the 2015 Blue Line was last confirmed in a Letter dated 9 June 2000 from the President of Lebanon addressed to the Secretary-General; after a border-crossing incident.


You are reading into this what you want.

If there is an international border between Israel and Lebanon, why the blue line?

Paragraph 11 of this report states that “for the practical purpose of confirming the Israeli withdrawal, the United Nations needs to identify a line to be adopted conforming to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon ...”​
They could not require Israel to withdraw across its own border because Israel has no border there.


RoccoR said:


> √ Article III(1) states: The resolution and the report, as well as the historical records and the various documents and maps, including those in the possession of the United Nations, confirm unequivocally that there are between Lebanon and Israel “internationally recognized boundaries” (Note: that term is in quotes and does not say international border.) that have never been in dispute between the two countries. Indeed, the descriptive delimitation of these boundaries completed in 1923 (The international border between Lebanon and Palestine) was meticulously retraced in 1949, (The 1949 armistice line that is not to be a political or territorial boundary.) under the supervision of the United Nations and its observers, from boundary pillar 1 to boundary pillar 38 by way of all those in between.



There is nothing here that shows that Israel has a border with Lebanon. That is the international border between Lebanon and Palestine.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

member said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > GLASNOST said:
> ...



Dumb, dumber and dumbest.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> Then, as now, its the rejection of the principle of self-determination and self-government for BOTH peoples


The Palestinians are Muslims, Christians, and Jews. They are one people.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici,  et al,
> 
> Let us start by remembering that the fundamental purposes of the UN as an organization is to maintain international peace and security.    The UN tries to act in the furtherance of prevention and removal of threats to the peace.   This is the very meaning behind Chapter I of the UN Charter with the intent to suppress acts of aggression and the outbreak of hostilities.
> 
> ...


You are still shoveling Israeli shit.

Nobody attacked Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Before the coordinated attack, the Israelis use the the territory outlined for the Jewish State in the Partition Plan.


Not true.

Israel told the US that Israel was declared on the proposed resolution 181 borders to dupe them into recognizing Israel.

No borders were mentioned in Israel's declaration of independence. Israel never recognized those as its borders. Nobody else did either because resolution 181 was never implemented.

At the time Israel was lying to the US about its borders, they had already blown past them and was ethnically cleansing Palestinians from the proposed Arab state and the International territory of Jerusalem.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Before the coordinated attack, the Israelis use the the territory outlined for the Jewish State in the Partition Plan.
> ...



When all else fails, float a conspiracy theory.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici,  et al,
> 
> Let us start by remembering that the fundamental purposes of the UN as an organization is to maintain international peace and security.    The UN tries to act in the furtherance of prevention and removal of threats to the peace.   This is the very meaning behind Chapter I of the UN Charter with the intent to suppress acts of aggression and the outbreak of hostilities.
> 
> ...



That would mean that the Jewish aggression, the attack and capture of Jaffa (part of the Arab partition) prior to the establishment of the Israeli state (or the Arab League intervention) was proper since it was not state against state. Israel declared itself a state on 14 May 1948, yet Jaffa, part of the "Arab" partition surrendered on May 12, 1948. How long had the Jews been invading the Arab partition before the surrender?  Who attacked who?

"On May 12, a deputation of Arab notables from Jaffa arrived at Haganah headquarters in Tel Aviv and, after negotiations, signed a surrender agreement."

THE CONQUEST OF JAFFA
Note: This is a Zionist site.

I'll have to check, but the Arab League forces were active within the Arab partition and the international sector (Jerusalem), not within the Jewish part of the partition.  So which state did the Arab League actually invade?

Anyway Rocco, keep bullshitting.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> The "Just War" Defense given by the LAS is that:
> 
> • Jewish aggression was the proximate cause of Peace and order having been completely upset in Palestine.
> • To prevent Jewish Forces from committing excessive (war crimes like) acts upon those peaceful Arabs and villagers of Deer Yasheen, Tiberias, and other places.
> • That the sovereignty and independence of the Jewish State was improperly establish and that only the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration.


Looks OK to me. Do you have a problem with it?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> No, the Christians of Palestine remained Christian and were the majority of the people in Palestine for centuries after the (Arab) conquest, and only slowly converted to Islam as it became increasingly socially and economically beneficial to adopt the religion (and culture) of the ruling class.



This is the very definition of colonialism.  You obviously don't have a problem with colonialism.  You not only accept it, you justify it as a viable way to change sovereignty and political power.  

Oh wait.  Until you think the Jews do it.  (They didn't).  Something reeks.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Then, as now, its the rejection of the principle of self-determination and self-government for BOTH peoples
> ...



Seriously?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

Hollie said:


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


Its true. Look it up.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



I just chuckle when I read your hysterical claims of "ethnic cleansing of Pal'istanians". Would these be the Invented Pal'istanians from your invented country of Pal'istan?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Nobody attacked Israel.



Only because you are playing silly word games claiming that Israel did not exist.  What the Arab States did, in contravention of the Charter, was gain control, using military force, of territory which was NOT under their sovereignty.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


He means they're one people.... minus the Jews, Christians and every other ethnic / religious minority that the Arabs-Moslems have expelled.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody attacked Israel.
> ...


You didn't read the links I posted for you.

Palestinians Reject Two State Solution


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



You make no sense.  What's your point?  That the Arab States (Jordan, Egypt and Syria, in particular) did NOT have international borders defining their territory?  Your usual argument is that "it wasn't Israel, it was Palestine".  Which makes not a bit of difference to my comment.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


The premise was that Israel was attacked. It was not.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



As I said, word games.  Israel was not attacked, because, in your mind, Israel did not and can not exist.  

So, the Jewish people, who had right by treaty and international law, who fulfilled the necessary steps to independence, who declared said independence, were attacked by Arab States who crossed out of their own sovereign territory into territory not under their sovereignty in order to claim and occupy said territory using military force, in contravention of the Charter.  

Better?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


But none of that matters.

Nobody attacked Israel.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Are you not paying attention?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 7, 2016)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Sure, nobody has shown where Israel was attacked.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > No, the Christians of Palestine remained Christian and were the majority of the people in Palestine for centuries after the (Arab) conquest, and only slowly converted to Islam as it became increasingly socially and economically beneficial to adopt the religion (and culture) of the ruling class.
> ...



No problem at all now that you accept that today's native Christians and Muslims of Palestine, whose ancestors practiced Roman, Judaic and other religions, were colonized by Romans, Arabians, European Crusaders, Turks, British and now European Jews.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


What you're befuddled with is the reality that the Arab-Moslem invaders are the most recent invaders.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 7, 2016)

Not very accurate since the most recent invaders came from Europe.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Not very accurate since the most recent invaders came from Europe.


I can accept your acknowledgement of the Arab-Moslem invasion. 

Your attempt to press your biased and laughably inept version of history with your silly Jew invaders nonsense is timewasting.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 7, 2016)

montelatici said:


> No problem at all now that you accept that today's native Christians and Muslims of Palestine, whose ancestors practiced Roman, Judaic and other religions, were colonized by Romans, Arabians, European Crusaders, Turks, British and now European Jews.



Okay, so colonization is legit, in your view.  You will no longer make comments or complain about colonization by anyone.  Deal?

(And no, the natives were the pre-conquest culture - the Jewish people.  Not the Christians nor the Arab Muslims.)


----------



## theliq (Dec 7, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > teddyearp said:
> ...


Moron speaks as MORON IS


----------



## theliq (Dec 7, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > No problem at all now that you accept that today's native Christians and Muslims of Palestine, whose ancestors practiced Roman, Judaic and other religions, were colonized by Romans, Arabians, European Crusaders, Turks, British and now European Jews.
> ...


NO THEY WERE NOT AT ALL......Check History not some Blind Zionist Synthetico's from the 1880's


----------



## theliq (Dec 7, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


ME.............Read My Lips or hear this song.....


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

Hollie said:


> It was thousands of years ago when Ghengis Khan invaded the area called Palestine. None of those kids "look" Chinese / Mongolian.
> 
> So once again, you refute your own argument with your cutting and pasting.


"Look"? You are actually giving weight to religious/national identity based on "looks"? You'd have loved Hitler and the Third Reich. Eugenics is right up your alley.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 7, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians are Muslims, Christians, and Jews. They are one people.


True. People of the west (those whose opinion is shaped by disinformation and 'omitted' information) haven't a clue. Some of the foremost Palestinian firebrands are Christians, but good luck trying to teach others to understand that.


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2016)

Hollie said:


> It was thousands of years ago when Ghengis Khan invaded the area called Palestine. None of those kids "look" Chinese / Mongolian.
> 
> So once again, you refute your own argument with your cutting and pasting.


HO,HO,HO......POOR HOLLIE.....DUMB AS A BAT AGAIN(SORRY TO INSULT BATS).....THE MONGOLS NEVER,NEVER EVER INVADED THE AREA WE CALL PALESTINE....BUT THEY DID INVADE PERSIA,CHINA,EUROPE TO ALMOST VIENNA,TURKEY,HUNGARY AND INPARLICULAR,GEORGIA,UKRAINE AND RUSSIA,WHERE THEY FIRST CAME IN CONTACT WITH JEWS....NEARLY ALL OF THE EUROPEANS(and those in America etc) JEWS ECT., HAVE AROUND 2% MINIMUM OF MONGOL DNA.......BUT YOUR SUMMATION THAT PALESTINIANS AND MONGOLS INTERACTED IS PUTTING IT KINDLY COMPLETE BULLSHIT......THE EUROPEAN JEWS DID THOUGH,NOT FORGETTING THAT ALL THE ASKENARSI JEWS/ZIONISTS ARE OF CENTRAL ASIATIC BACKGROUND..themagnificent


----------



## Shusha (Dec 8, 2016)

theliq said:


> NO THEY WERE NOT AT ALL......Check History not some Blind Zionist Synthetico's from the 1880's



Steve, seriously?  You are going to argue that the Christians and the Muslims preceded the Jewish people in Holy Land?  Come on.


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2016)

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > NO THEY WERE NOT AT ALL......Check History not some Blind Zionist Synthetico's from the 1880's
> ...


Not at all, but the Canaanites,Moabites were there long before....The Israelites invaded the Holy Land(and again in 1948) and made the Canaanite Capital of Salem their Capital Jerusalem (as they did to the Palestinians last Century)....absorbed the women and children from both peoples into the Tribes of Israel and completely annihilated the men and leaders from both peoples,......How could there be Christians or the Muslims who started in the 600's AD,do you think I'm Thick Or What!!!!!!!!!!Of course not,you know me now only as The Magnificent...LOL


----------



## Hollie (Dec 8, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It was thousands of years ago when Ghengis Khan invaded the area called Palestine. None of those kids "look" Chinese / Mongolian.
> ...


You're a bit slow with reading comprehension skills.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 8, 2016)

theliq said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It was thousands of years ago when Ghengis Khan invaded the area called Palestine. None of those kids "look" Chinese / Mongolian.
> ...


You need to update your wiki searches. 

Did you know the mongols invented punctuation? Really, its true. You can read about it during your wiki search.


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 8, 2016)

Hollie said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > "Look"? You are actually giving weight to religious/national identity based on "looks"? You'd have loved Hitler and the Third Reich. Eugenics is right up your alley.
> ...


If I am, you would have offered an explanation. But you haven't so I am not.


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2016)

Hollie said:


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


Thank you very much  Hollie....Mongolian script - Wikipedia


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2016)

Hollie said:


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


The Mongols are/were fascinating and brilliant,do you know that their postal system was not improved until the invention of the Airplane...true.....Ghengis also used the Chinese for all his administration,had freedom of Religion all and invited many peoples to his Capital in Quaquran......he had the largest Empire,would ask before attacking anyone if they would join him...if they attacked or refused it was then a fight to the death........so encompassing were the Mongols that most people worldwide have some Mongol DNA,.....had he not died when he did,he would have conquered all of Europe and beyond.

Again thanks for the info .....suppose maybe I'm a bit of a BAT tonight 8.40 pm here,again thanks Hollie...steven........I'll get off my knees now, LOL


----------



## montelatici (Dec 8, 2016)

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > NO THEY WERE NOT AT ALL......Check History not some Blind Zionist Synthetico's from the 1880's
> ...



Many of the ancestors of the native Christians and Muslims of Palestine practiced Judaism before conversion to the religions of the rulers, as the rulers changed. Why can't you get that simple fact through your thick head.  The Zionists were Europeans, very little Middle Eastern about them.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 8, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > No problem at all now that you accept that today's native Christians and Muslims of Palestine, whose ancestors practiced Roman, Judaic and other religions, were colonized by Romans, Arabians, European Crusaders, Turks, British and now European Jews.
> ...



The natives are, in fact, descendants of the the indigenous people.  That they converted to the religion of the changing rulers by law, forcibly or voluntarily does not change the people.  The fact is, however, that the European Zionists were European, from another continent.


----------



## member (Dec 8, 2016)

montelatici said:


> member said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...








​


_*"Dumb, dumber and dumbest"*_







Which one am I again...?







​


----------



## montelatici (Dec 8, 2016)

You were 


member said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > member said:
> ...



No. 3.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 8, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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


Tinmore, when you and your assistant get a break from being on duty monitoring the forum  for Hamas, I suggest you buy or rent the movie Cast a Giant Shadow.  It is based on a true study.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00005S8KR/?tag=ff0d01-20


----------



## montelatici (Dec 8, 2016)

Since when are Hollywood movies based on "true studies"? LOL


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 8, 2016)

montelatici said:


> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> > Again, I still call that quite a stretch to assert that MJB thinks that there are Muslim Archbishops.
> ...



Hmm. Nice try Monti. You are smarter than that and I thought you had a much better command of the English language than what you show here. But your own postings seem to show otherwise.

Please, please, show us *exactly* where and quote where MJB said anything about Muslim* Archbishops.*  By your own admission and quote, he used the term Muslim Palestinians.  How is a Muslim Palestinian equated with a Muslim Archbishop?

But, we understand.  You have been on the 'spin' cycle so very long here that all semblance of intelligence has clearly left you.  And I know you know better, as you sit in your private room kneading your hands and snickering thinking that you're fooling someone, you are not.

Now who's dumber(est)?  Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 8, 2016)

montelatici said:


> The Zionists that invaded Palestine and displaced the native Christians and Muslims were from Europe.  That's all there is to know.  They were not inhabitants of Palestine as Article 22 of the LON Covenant stated were to receive tutelage to be able to become an independent state.  Furthermore, European Jews are European genitically:
> 
> *Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European*
> 
> ...



Oh for fucks sake, here it is again, new readers . . . . . .


----------



## Hollie (Dec 8, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Since when are Hollywood movies based on "true studies"? LOL


Since when is your cutting and pasting from Pallywood Propaganda Studios to be taken seriously? 

Shirley Temper? You poor befuddled cut and paster, LOL.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 8, 2016)

teddyearp said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > teddyearp said:
> ...



Well, you are competing for the dumbest.LOL It wasn't MJ posted an article about the Greek Orthodox Church firing a Palestinian Archbishop and his comment was:

"It is truly sad that* Muslim* Palestinians cannot even get along with fellow Christian Palestinians."



Oh, another poster pointed this out to MJ first, not me.

"You realize that the Palestinian Archbishop is a Christian? Did you think that a muslim was the archbishop of a Christian church?"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/15987752/

You win the dumbest prize, moron.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 8, 2016)

montelatici said:


> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Don't minimize your own achievements. Cutting and pasting Shirley Temper / Pallywood Production Studios propaganda photos you scour from the web puts you in the dumbest prize running.


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2016)

Hossfly said:


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


Hoss,this is not another one of these Hollywood Epics(like so many) That make out that those Jonny-Come-Latelys to WW2,the Americans WON THE WAR and changed History and Material Fact to imply so........if so NOT GOOD ENOUGH Hoss......You are off topic and have Hollywooditis(mind you they make some fabulous War Movies) Hoss I will get in early,Wishing You and your Family a Very Happy and Safe Christmas and New Year..steve


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 8, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Since when are Hollywood movies based on "true studies"? LOL


There have been many movies based on actual events.  Don't forget also there were many people alive who took part in this Israeli/Arab War who could tell the scriptwriters what actually happened.  Maybe in your neck of the wood you can find some who participated.  They might be in their late eighties and nineties by now, but can tell you what happened and that the movie followed the truth.  Perhaps you can get away from the computer for a time and watch the movie yourself.  By the way, Colonel David "Mickey" Marcus is the only person buried at West Point who fought for a foreign country.

David 'Mickey' Marcus | HistoryNet


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > teddyearp said:
> ...


I cannot agree Hollie.......you can say that to me (as I do ERR on occasions,and you swiftly put me in my place,fair enough) but not Monte,he is clearly a Titan amongst us.Go Monte....steve


----------



## theliq (Dec 8, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Since when are Hollywood movies based on "true studies"? LOL
> ...


Why Hoss ???re David Marcus..st


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Since when are Hollywood movies based on "true studies"? LOL


That's the question we'd all like answered. I suppose it's depth of definition *"based"* that lies at the heart of the matter. All you need is to point out that at the beginning of the story "our hero left the house in the morning". After he left home he slayed 24 dragons and sodomized the corps of Yassar Arafat. The story therefore is "based" on a true story because his day actually did begin by him "leaving the house that morning".

*Here's proof!*


----------



## theliq (Dec 9, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Since when are Hollywood movies based on "true studies"? LOL
> ...


Really Glasnost.....What are you really saying!!!!!!?????? Did the Man when he left home in the morning really Sodomize the thousands of Yasser Arafat's soldiers(his Corps) OR did you mean Yasser Arafat's CORPSE as in dead body,if so the Man was DEBASED and a NECROPHILIAC or could he have been a wandering NOCTAMBULIST????therefore would be the true depth of Definition methinks.just sayin


steve


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 9, 2016)

theliq said:


> GLASNOST said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


Sorry about that mate. I've been feeling crook all day. Too right .......  "corpse" is what I was after. But it wouldn't matter - it was based on a true story anyway.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 9, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



There were some Jewish inhabitants, but they were Palestinians along with their Christian and Muslim co-religionists; most Jewish natives were fervent anti-Zionists and were against the Jewish European colonists at the outset and indeed in many cases up until 1948, by then, they no longer had any choice in the matter; they were "tarred with the same brush" as are many Jewish Europeans and Americans.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


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



The truth will out, everything outside the original 181 partition is occupied Palestine. thanks for sharing.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 9, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> The Arab-Israeli Conflict up to the Armistice Agreements expanded the area under the control and direct influence of Jewish Forces.



It's called occupied territory.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 9, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici,  et al,
> 
> Let us start by remembering that the fundamental purposes of the UN as an organization is to maintain international peace and security.    The UN tries to act in the furtherance of prevention and removal of threats to the peace.   This is the very meaning behind Chapter I of the UN Charter with the intent to suppress acts of aggression and the outbreak of hostilities.
> 
> ...



Rambling RoccoR seems to overlook there was no UN condenmation of the action by the neighbouring states intervention to prevent the Zionists ethnically cleansing Palestine.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> This is the very definition of colonialism.



Nope. Imperialism, there's a difference.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Yes, one people, different religions.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody attacked Israel.
> ...


Now who's playing silly word games?


----------



## Challenger (Dec 9, 2016)

Hossfly said:


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



Just like "Braveheart" or "The Patriot"


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Indeed, just like in the US of A.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 9, 2016)

Challenger said:


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



Yep!  Those Zionists are "ethnically cleansing" the Palestinians.  In 1948 there were approximately 1.2 million Palestinians living in Israel. And now there are only just over 6 million of them left.  It's a GENOCIDE I tell ya, a GENOCIDE!

Population Statistics - Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - ProCon.org


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 9, 2016)

1).


Challenger said:


> There were some Jewish inhabitants, but they were Palestinians along with their Christian and Muslim co-religionists; most Jewish natives were fervent anti-Zionists and were against the Jewish European colonists at the outset and indeed in many cases up until 1948, by then, they no longer had any choice in the matter; they were "tarred with the same brush" as are many Jewish Europeans and Americans.


*YES.*
2).


Challenger said:


> The truth will out, everything outside the original 181 partition is occupied Palestine. thanks for sharing.


*BRAVO.*
3).


Challenger said:


> It's called occupied territory.


*BINGO.*
4).


Challenger said:


> Rambling RoccoR seems to overlook there was no UN condenmation of the action by the neighbouring states intervention to prevent the Zionists ethnically cleansing Palestine.


*EXACTLY.*
5).


Challenger said:


> Nope. Imperialism, there's a difference.


*PRECISELY.*
6).


Challenger said:


> Yes, one people, different religions.


*MAZEL TOV!*


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



You still haven't been able to understand the definition of Genocide.  And now you seen to be having trouble with Ethnic Cleansing.  Why do you constantly make a fool of yourself. Let's go over Genocide again, maybe the third time will do it. Note: at least three of the acts have and are being committed by the Jews.

*"Article II:  In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:*

*(a) Killing members of the group; 
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; 
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; 
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; 
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."*

*Article III:  The following acts shall be punishable:*

*(a) Genocide; 
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide; 
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide; 
(e) Complicity in genocide. "*


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Aw, bless you Monte for saying  the Palestinians are committing a genocide on the Israeli's.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Let's go over Genocide again, maybe the third time will do it. Note: at least three of the acts have and are being committed by the Jews.



The commission of these acts does not define the term "genocide".  Genocide requires the intent to destroy a group.  

There is no intent by Israel to destroy the group Palestinians.  

And this is a really, really inappropriate time to use the word "Jews".  This is an instance when you should be using the term "Israel" to criticize the actions of the Israeli government and not collectively blame "the Jews".


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Let's go over Genocide again, maybe the third time will do it. Note: at least three of the acts have and are being committed by the Jews.
> ...



The Israeli Jews have (and have had) every intent to destroy the Palestinians.  From claiming they did not exist (as many posters here claim) to killing thousands of them at time every now and then, when they think they can get away with it with not too much criticism.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 9, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...



Monte, I have to give you credit.  What other Pali support would prove to us the Palestinians are committing a genocide on the Israelis.  And who said Monte is an imbecile?  Read this folks.  


*"Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:*

*(a) Killing members of the group; 
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; 
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; 
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; 
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."*

*Article III: The following acts shall be punishable:*

*(a) Genocide; 
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide; 
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide; 
(e) Complicity in genocide. "*


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> The Israeli Jews have (and have had) every intent to destroy the Palestinians.  From claiming they did not exist (as many posters here claim) to killing thousands of them at time every now and then, when they think they can get away with it with not too much criticism.



Wow.  Do you actually believe this?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Palestinians are not trying to destroy the Israelis.  They are trying to get their land back. There is a difference.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Palestinians are not trying to destroy the Israelis.  They are trying to get their land back. There is a difference.



The Jewish people aren't trying to destroy the Palestinians.  They are trying to get their land and their sovereignty back.  Not to mention creating a safe and secure place for the Jewish people.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > The Israeli Jews have (and have had) every intent to destroy the Palestinians.  From claiming they did not exist (as many posters here claim) to killing thousands of them at time every now and then, when they think they can get away with it with not too much criticism.
> ...



Of course. No need to provide Israeli politician quotes, and there are many, the Israel First  posters here that make it very clear.  Do you not read the posts?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> Genocide requires the intent to destroy a group.


Indeed, and Israel has been trying to erase Palestinians from history. This confirms the intent.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Palestinians are not trying to destroy the Israelis.  They are trying to get their land back. There is a difference.
> ...



Palestine did not belong to Jews.  It belonged to the native inhabitants, the Christians and Muslims that inhabited the land for thousands of years before the European invasion.  Let's get that straight. This idea that a bunch of people in Europe claiming to be of a particular religion, had the right to expel or otherwise eliminate the inhabitants of a place because of some myth, is ridiculous. 

The creation of a state for these Europeans was predicated on the destruction of the native people, the Palestinians.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Palestine did not belong to Jews.  It belonged to the native inhabitants, the Christians and Muslims that inhabited the land for thousands of years before the European invasion.  Let's get that straight. This idea that a bunch of people in Europe claiming to be of a particular religion, had the right to expel or otherwise eliminate the inhabitants of a place because of some myth, is ridiculous.
> 
> The creation of a state for these Europeans was predicated on the destruction of the native people, the Palestinians.



And you don't see this as erasing the history of the Jews?  Erasing the Jewish people?  Which is genocide, according to you.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

What, the invasion of Palestine by Europeans and the expulsion and killing of the native inhabitants erased the history of the Jews?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 9, 2016)

fanger said:


> An opinion piece written By Jennifer Rubin December 17, 2013









 Then lets look at the evidence shall we

 In 1917 the arab muslims were offered a place on the LoN mandate committee to discus the equal allocation of the lands formerly owned by the Ottoman Empire..................They refused and demanded they be given the whole lot as their god told them it was theirs

They tried many times to destroy the Jews and failed because they are not used to going against an armed opponent

In 1947 the UN illegally tried to buy them of with partitioning the Jewish national home and they refused again demanding the whole lot as their god told them

They then attacked and invaded Israel in may 1948 and were defeated yet again, all 5 arab league armies that outnumbered and out gunned the Jews. The Jews offered them friendship and peace and they refused 


So where have they ever accepted a two state solution, even their charter says they will fight for an islamic state to the last man.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > The Arabs who started calling themselves "Palestinian" a few decades back for political purposes have never wanted a separate state.  They could have had one at just about any point in time over the last 70 years if A -- they were an actual, distinct people and B -- actually wanted a state.
> ...









 Not a legal document as the British had no authority to talk to the arab muslims. And as we can see they were demanding they be given it all and to hell with the rights of the indigenous Jews and Christians.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 9, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > For Palestinians it's all or nothing.  So nothing it shall be.
> ...







Read monte's cut and paste and you seethat the arab muslims demand it all


 " *no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable."*


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJ is not he sharpest knife in the drawer, he has posted that there are Muslim Archbishops. He probably never read the article himself.








 LINK, and it must say those exact words.....................


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...







 But never as palestinians


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> What, the invasion of Palestine by Europeans and the expulsion and killing of the native inhabitants erased the history of the Jews?








 So what about the invasion of palestine by Europeans that were Christians with no actual ties to the lands. You know the Roman Catholics that invaded and ethnically cleansed the Jews from palestine. Those are the Europeans that you are talking about, not the slaves they took back with them in the 4C who are returning to their roots.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



You are overlooking a very important point.  While the movies you mentioned are historical fiction, Cast a Giant Shadow was based on current events.  People were still alive (and many still are) who contributed to the validity of the script since they were among those who fought in the Israeli/Arab War.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

In 1925 most of the individuals involved in the mutiny of the Battleship Potemkin that took place in 1905, were still alive and had fought against the Imperial Navy.  Doesn't mean the film was accurate.  It was completely one-sided for the Communists.  Just as "Cast the Shadow" glorifies the invasion of Palestine by Europeans and the defeat of the native non-Jews; making it appear that violent attacks on native non-Europeans by hostile invaders is just fine.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 9, 2016)

GLASNOST, Challenger, et al,

This timeframe is 1948.  The UN was about 3 years old.

I have actually have mentioned it, but only in passing - as a matter of coercion and intimidate.  It is a "bandwagon" effect by members which is a controversial issue.

BUT!  You both are correct, in that a rarely mention it.



GLASNOST said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Rambling RoccoR seems to overlook there was no UN condemnation of the action by the neighboring states intervention to prevent the Zionists ethnically cleansing Palestine.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The General Assembly speaks out both sides of its mouth.

On the one-hand, I concede that the UN has passed some 100+ Resolutions against Israel in one form or another.  That is a matter of record (See UN resolutions against Israel)(_*Dark Politrick*_).   AND!  Out of these 100+ Resolutions there are 40 ∑ that are either condemnations or demands.

I believe that these 100+ Resolution have attached stigma of "Crying Wolf."  (_Aesop's Fables_) The UN publishes them as fast as the UN Palestine Mission / PLO Member write them.  And what they have done is made so many that I don't read them any more.  They all have the same theme, with the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) provoking an incident or event, the Israelis responding, and then they go parading the dead through the streets for the media exploitation _(Huge Crocodile Tears)_ crying to the UN, Human Rights activities, all the NGO, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) --- with the mantra that they have had for the last century, whinning (in that high-pitched complaining cry that only the HoAP can muster) that the dirty rotten, thieving and conniving European Jew that mounted an armed invasion and took our land is trying to ethnically cleanse the region and take even more territory that has been theirs for thousands of years.

OK, I admit it.  That I pay absolutely no attention to the whimpering howls and moans of the HoAP and the citizenry of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.    All those resolutions have done is kill more trees and take more bandwidth.  The HoAP and the Citizenry that support the Palestinian terrorist that follow Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence, are NOT setting forth any conflict resolutions proposals.  They are, in fact, advocating for more death and destruction; and acting up in a fashion that will require more security countermeasure.

OH, and yes, I do sometimes ramble.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

RoccoR , I agree, except with the rambling part.  You always have a point to your posts.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Palestine did not belong to Jews.  It belonged to the native inhabitants, the Christians and Muslims that inhabited the land for thousands of years before the European invasion.  Let's get that straight. This idea that a bunch of people in Europe claiming to be of a particular religion, had the right to expel or otherwise eliminate the inhabitants of a place because of some myth, is ridiculous.



Let's try this again....

You don't think "Palestine did not belong to the Jews" erases Jewish history??
You don't think "(the land) belonged to the native ... Christians and Muslims..." erases Jewish history?
You don't think "because of some myth" erases Jewish history?

And I have never argued that anyone has the right to expel or eliminate anyone else.  Indeed, though, you seem to feel that the Palestinians have the right to destroy the existing State of Israel and expel or otherwise eliminate the current inhabitants.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> GLASNOST, Challenger, et al,
> 
> This timeframe is 1948.  The UN was about 3 years old.
> 
> ...



Correct, the conniving (connived with the British to have the Balfour Declaration issued) European Jews mounted an armed invasion and took most of the land that the ancestors of the native Middle Eastern Muslims and Christians had lived on for thousands of years. And are continuing grab up more and more of said land.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Palestine did not belong to Jews.  It belonged to the native inhabitants, the Christians and Muslims that inhabited the land for thousands of years before the European invasion.  Let's get that straight. This idea that a bunch of people in Europe claiming to be of a particular religion, had the right to expel or otherwise eliminate the inhabitants of a place because of some myth, is ridiculous.
> ...



1. Correct, Palestine, did not belong to the Zionist.  It belonged to the inhabitants, who happened to be Muslim and Christian at the time of the invasion. How could Palestine have belonged to Europeans? 

2. Palestine belonged to the inhabitants who were overwhelmingly either Muslim or Christian at the start of the Zionist invasion. Who else could it have belonged to?

3. Of course it's a myth that Europeans that happen to have converted to Judaism had anything to do with Jewish history.

Apparently you believe that the invasion of Palestine by the Europeans was justified and that the conquered people have no right to resist their current second-class status.  I am not promoting the expulsion of the Jewish inhabitants, the crime was committed and there is nothing that can be done about the current demographics.  What should happen, now that a state for the Palestinian cannot be created practically a single state should be a secular state for all the people of Palestine, like any normal modern western state.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> In 1925 most of the individuals involved in the mutiny of the Battleship Potemkin that took place in 1905, were still alive and had fought against the Imperial Navy.  Doesn't mean the film was accurate.  It was completely one-sided for the Communists.  Just as "Cast the Shadow" glorifies the invasion of Palestine by Europeans and the defeat of the native non-Jews; making it appear that violent attacks on native non-Europeans by hostile invaders is just fine.



One of the amusing things on this forum is when you see a Jew hater parked here all day long like it was his second home and one who can't stand  to see a film brought up that gives what happened to his  Arab friends.  All those who think this film is fictitious, why not send birthday greets to Kirk Douglas on his 100th birthday and ask him if he could tell you who was around to verify the accuracy of the script.  He might remember their names and if they are still alive for you to contact them.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


Other than for purposes of your usual propaganda, your Zionist Invasion™   slogan is as pointless with this most recent cut and paste as the previous instances. It's a shame you don't understand the terms and slogans you use.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > In 1925 most of the individuals involved in the mutiny of the Battleship Potemkin that took place in 1905, were still alive and had fought against the Imperial Navy.  Doesn't mean the film was accurate.  It was completely one-sided for the Communists.  Just as "Cast the Shadow" glorifies the invasion of Palestine by Europeans and the defeat of the native non-Jews; making it appear that violent attacks on native non-Europeans by hostile invaders is just fine.
> ...



I am a Jew-hater because I question the veracity of Hollywood interpretations of historical events. LOL


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



You didn't answer my questions.  I am asking if you think your beliefs erase Jewish history.  

Your answer above seems to be either:

1.  It does erase Jewish history, but its justified (its okay to erase Jewish history) OR
2.  There is no Jewish history to erase.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Apparently you believe that the invasion of Palestine by the Europeans was justified and that the conquered people have no right to resist their current second-class status.  I am not promoting the expulsion of the Jewish inhabitants, the crime was committed and there is nothing that can be done about the current demographics.  What should happen, now that a state for the Palestinian cannot be created practically a single state should be a secular state for all the people of Palestine, like any normal modern western state.



Well, I believe that migration to ancestral homelands is justified and not especially harmful in most cases, including this one had it been met with Feisal's attitude of a hearty welcome home.  I believe in the right of an invaded and conquered peoples to resist their occupation by foreigners -- and it is self-evident that the Jewish people are the invaded and conquered peoples.  I am also not promoting the expulsion of anyone (including the Jewish "settlers" which I am pretty sure you do support expelling.)  IF a crime of expulsion has been committed, it has been committed by (and only by) the Muslim ME nations which expelled their Jewish populations.  And I agree the current demographics are an egg that can't be unbroken (and needn't be).

It seems unlikely that a single State is a practical solution given the current animosity between the two parties.  Why not two States?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Was Jewish history "erased" before the Zionists invaded Palestine?   I don't get your point.  Was it necessary to expel the native Muslims and Christians of Palestine from their land and home to prevent the erasure of Jewish history?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently you believe that the invasion of Palestine by the Europeans was justified and that the conquered people have no right to resist their current second-class status.  I am not promoting the expulsion of the Jewish inhabitants, the crime was committed and there is nothing that can be done about the current demographics.  What should happen, now that a state for the Palestinian cannot be created practically a single state should be a secular state for all the people of Palestine, like any normal modern western state.
> ...



The armed migration of Europeans to Palestine was extremely harmful to the native Muslims and Christians. How can people from Europe that went to Palestine to establish a Jewish state be the invaded people?  You are ridiculous. So, the Muslims and Christians were not expelled from Palestine in your opinion.  The reason there will never be a solution because people like you, who are perhaps less rabid than some others, live in a fantasy world regarding the actual events in order to justify what anyone with a neutral view can see was a European land grab from native people living on another continent.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Was Jewish history "erased" before the Zionists invaded Palestine?   I don't get your point.  Was it necessary to expel the native Muslims and Christians of Palestine from their land and home to prevent the erasure of Jewish history?



My point, originally, was that anti-Zionism is not about Palestinian rights.  But about the erasure, retraction, refusal, restriction and rejection of Jewish rights.  

And that the fact that one peoples have rights does not prevent the other from also having rights.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> So, the Muslims and Christians were not expelled from Palestine in your opinion.



They were uprooted as a result of an unnecessary war brought about by Arabs from foreign sovereign States. This was not so with the Jewish expulsion.  The Jewish people were not at war with anyone in their own native lands of the Muslim ME where they have lived for hundreds or thousands of years.

I can solve the conflict in less than a week, if I had a Team Palestine participant willing to actually engage in negotiations with me.  Do you want to volunteer?  I'll start a thread.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Was Jewish history "erased" before the Zionists invaded Palestine?   I don't get your point.  Was it necessary to expel the native Muslims and Christians of Palestine from their land and home to prevent the erasure of Jewish history?
> ...



As long as Zionism (or any ideology) does not include the expulsion of native people and oppression of people because of their religions as part of the manifestation  of the ideology. I have no problem with it.  Palestinians are not afforded rights, they are under military occupation and that certainly prevents them from having rights.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


Your cutting and pasting of Pallywood Production Studios propaganda pieces starring Shirley Temper was a hoot. 

It does suggest your versions of historical (hysterical) events leaves a great deal of "make it up as you go" to your Islamist heroes.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> As long as Zionism (or any ideology) does not include the expulsion of native people and oppression of people because of their religions as part of the manifestation  of the ideology. I have no problem with it.



Zionism does not require the expulsion or oppression of people.  Certainly not because of religion, as Zionism does not speak to religion.  



> Palestinians are not afforded rights, they are under military occupation and that certainly prevents them from having rights.


And my take on this is that Palestinians have rights, including the right to self-determination and that they only have to act on that to achieve it.  Military occupation does not prevent them from exercising peaceful rights.  It only prevents them from exercising belligerent acts.  

The wars with Gaza would be over in a year if Palestinians just stopped attacking.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > So, the Muslims and Christians were not expelled from Palestine in your opinion.
> ...



The Muslims and Christians were being expelled (and killed) long before the Arab League intervened in attempt to stop the Jewish expulsion and killing of non-Jews.  For example, the Jews started bombarding Jaffa (part of the Arab section of the Partition plan) in mid-April and the surrendered on May 12, 1948.  Other Arab towns had fallen as well, long before Israel declared independence and before the Arab League intervened a few days later.   Besides, all the major battles were fought in the Arab section of the partition and the international sector (Jerusalem) where the Arab League tried to protect the non-Jews, not in the Jewish section of the partition.You see Susha, you have been sold a bill of goods.

Sure I'll negotiate, but I now believe only a single state solution will work.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Sure I'll negotiate, but I now believe only a single state solution will work.



Cool.  I'll set up a thread.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Roger that.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Don't give up your day job, Monte.  A stand-up comedian you will never be.  From all of Monte's posts from morning to night (he must bring his lunch and an afternoon snack) to demonize the Jews, this is what he came up with???


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Oh shut up you ignorant piece of crap.  You are here 24/7.  I leave for months at a time.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Oh shut up you ignorant piece of crap.  You are here 24/7.  I leave for months at a time.



 hope Monte doesn't mind if I take a page from his own book and tell this "ignorant piece of crap to shut up."
Of course, Monte is going to prove that I am on these forums 24/7 even when I am going from one destination to another by car.  You will do that, wouldn't you, you "ignorant piece of crap?"  Monte is never gone for months at a time, and for all we know when he is gone, he is in for his shock treatments.

What's for the snack tomorrow, Monte, as you sit here demonizing the Jews?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Just shut up.  You are making a fool of yourself.  You have no facts you just attack people that don't agree with you.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Just shut up.  You are making a fool of yourself.  You have no facts you just attack people that don't agree with you.





​


----------



## theliq (Dec 9, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


You missed the point MJ......The Zionists  tried and slaughtered 100,000's of Palestinians......The Palestinians have a stronger and abundant Semenal flow and the ladies bare children well, compared to Jews and Europeans for example,so where the Palestinians have increased their population naturally,the Zionists have had to import "Synthetico Jews" to raise and increase the Jewish population......FACT as ALWAYS..STEVIE....Remember Hoss and all,the strength of any nation is in their Semen.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2016)

theliq said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


I always hear from the Pali faction about Jews killing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. Where are all the bodies buried and why is this never in the news?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Well, 2,300 in one year multiplied by 56 years equals what? 

Israel killed more Palestinians in 2014 than in any other year since 1967


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Well, 2,300 in one year multiplied by 56 years equals what?
> 
> Israel killed more Palestinians in 2014 than in any other year since 1967


The bastards started the 2014 war then the UN cries because they got killed. Tough titty.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

I see, so the Jews did kill 100,000 Palestinians but it was their fault.  So you were full of shit when you denied the fact asshole.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 9, 2016)

montelatici said:


> I see, so the Jews did kill 100,000 Palestinians but it was their fault.  So you were full of shit when you denied the fact asshole.



I think I will use this site since the Pro Palis have used it from time to time when it suited them.

Total Casualties, Arab-Israeli Conflict | Jewish Virtual Library


----------



## montelatici (Dec 9, 2016)

Oh, the Zionist propaganda site par excellence.  The Jewish Virtual Library is where you get your facts?  What an asshole you are. LOL


----------



## theliq (Dec 10, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...


I know you must have been Blind Drunk at the Time Hossie,but it is well documented my friend.....LOL.......Stephen,steven,the Magnificent one,theliq


----------



## theliq (Dec 10, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Well, 2,300 in one year multiplied by 56 years equals what?
> ...


silly post Hoss


----------



## yiostheoy (Dec 10, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> For Palestinians it's all or nothing.  So nothing it shall be.
> 
> 
> Maybe Palestinians don’t want two states


Spam bot.

Ignore list.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Well, 2,300 in one year multiplied by 56 years equals what?
> 
> Israel killed more Palestinians in 2014 than in any other year since 1967





montelatici said:


> Well, 2,300 in one year multiplied by 56 years equals what?
> 
> Israel killed more Palestinians in 2014 than in any other year since 1967


"Monty Math" is as ridiculous as your claim of 100,000 dead Arab-Moslem squatters.

2014 was an especially deadly year for Islamic terrorists, But, as we know, Islamic terrorism carries consequences.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


> In 1925 most of the individuals involved in the mutiny of the Battleship Potemkin that took place in 1905, were still alive and had fought against the Imperial Navy.  Doesn't mean the film was accurate.  It was completely one-sided for the Communists.  Just as "Cast the Shadow" glorifies the invasion of Palestine by Europeans and the defeat of the native non-Jews; making it appear that violent attacks on native non-Europeans by hostile invaders is just fine.








 And yet you have no concrete evidence that they were "natives" do you, you are just going on the word of known liars


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


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









 Yet they did not arrive armed for war did they, but armed for peace with farm tools. It was the arab muslims that were armed with deadly weapons and did not expect the Jewish invited migrants to respond to their violent attacks. When they did they cried foul and have been doing so ever since, when the Christians start fighting back then you might understand that it is the arab muslims all along


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...








 So what happened to the majority Jews in your fantasy tale, did they just cease to exist

 According to the Ottoman census at that time the Jews were overwhelmingly the majority of the inhabitants

 Yes it is , one made up and touted by the islamonazi's and neonazi's  to demonise the Jews. The Jewish history as wrote down by Roman, Greek and islamic scribes 2000 years ago is fact that you cant dispute as you have no first hand experience to use as rebutal


You still have not proved that the Jews invaded palestine as two historical facts stand in your way
1   The Jews were invited to migrate and colonise the land by the Ottomans around 1850

2   The Jews were invited to migrate and close colonise the land by the LoN in around 1920

Both these facts destroy your invasion theory

 Your pushing for a single state is calling for the ethnic cleansing of the Jews as there would be nothing to prevent an armed invasion by the muslims from the surrounding area and wiping out the Jews


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Oh, the Zionist propaganda site par excellence.  The Jewish Virtual Library is where you get your facts?  What an asshole you are. LOL


Why don't you call your Pro Pali friends assholes when they use this site?  Actually, you are too dim to realize it, but you calling people assholes, morons, idiots says an awful lot about you and not them.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 10, 2016)

So, if someone quoted Electronic Intifada as the source supporting an assertion you would accept it as a neutral source?  You are not only a hypocrite, but also a dimwit.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 10, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> Yet they did not arrive armed for war did they,


Yes they did. They mooched Britain's military.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


> So, if someone quoted Electronic Intifada as the source supporting an assertion you would accept it as a neutral source?  You are not only a hypocrite, but also a dimwit.


The Jewish Virtual Library and the Electronic Intifada are both good sites. They both have their own political bent but both try to be accurate. I don't think either one is a hate site.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 10, 2016)

I don't trust either.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


> So, if someone quoted Electronic Intifada as the source supporting an assertion you would accept it as a neutral source?  You are not only a hypocrite, but also a dimwit.


Unlike you, I don't go around calling people ass holes and others names because of the sources they use.  As I stated previously, your name calling tells an awful lot about you and not the posters who are the recipients of the names.  Meanwhile, look in the mirror to see a hypocrite and dimwit.

Since you obviously are going to park yourself on this forum today, I hope you brought a healthy snack to keep you going.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 10, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Yet they did not arrive armed for war did they,
> ...









 Then produce the link to the British military that says this ?

 Without it you are just a bare faced liar


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Well, you are competing for the dumbest.LOL It *wasn't *MJ posted an article about the Greek Orthodox Church firing a Palestinian Archbishop and his comment was:
> 
> "It is truly sad that* Muslim* Palestinians cannot even get along with fellow Christian Palestinians."



It *wasn't* MJB that posted it? Your link below shows that it was MJB that started the thread.  So which is it?



montelatici said:


> Oh, another poster pointed this out to MJ first, not me.
> 
> "You realize that the Palestinian Archbishop is a Christian? Did you think that a muslim was the archbishop of a Christian church?"
> 
> ...



I do see your twist on this mini argument, my point in it was only that MJB did not use the term "Muslim Archbishop" which you seemed to have credited him with.

But that's OK. I am done splitting hairs and getting off the topic here. I will be the moron if that makes you feel as smart as you want to be.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 10, 2016)

The ceaseless attempt to defend the indefensible extends beyond Israel's actions to the actions of Israel Firsters.  MJB posted the article to assert that  Muslim and Christians Palestinians were unable to to get along.  The parties involved in the article were the Greek Orthodox Church's leader in Palestine and a Palestinian archbishop. So, MJB believed one of the parties was Muslim and the other Christian.  So, MJB believed that either the leader of the Greek Orthodox Church was Muslim and the archbishop Christian or that the archbishop was Christian and the leader of the Greek Orthodox Church in Palestine was Muslim.  Take your pick.


----------



## teddyearp (Dec 10, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Since when are Hollywood movies based on "true studies"? LOL
> ...



I have also watched the movie, "Cast a Giant Shadow".  Sure it is somewhat fictionalized, but it is based upon true events. The lead actor, Kirk Douglas, who plays David 'Mickey' Marcus is actually a Jew as well.

But to add credence to Marcus, here is a picture of the memorial that is along the road to Be'er Sheeva in Israel:






Look in the left column, ninth name down.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 10, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Not in so many words, but when Britain changed from an occupying power to a Mandate in Transjordan they withdrew their forces leaving a few advisors behind.

When Britain changed from an occupying power to a Mandate in Palestine they kept their military force.

Why the difference?


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 10, 2016)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Well, that is a matter of perception.  One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.  

This image of the Arab is still with use today.  Whether we picture them settling bombs off in restaurants, suicide bombers on a crowed beach, kidnapping and murdering teenagers, or sending a laser-guided missile into the side of a school bus, the image that the name of the Arab Palestinians invokes is one of sheer barbarism.



P F Tinmore said:


> Not in so many words, but when Britain changed from an occupying power to a Mandate in Transjordan they withdrew their forces leaving a few advisors behind.
> 
> When Britain changed from an occupying power to a Mandate in Palestine they kept their military force.
> 
> Why the difference?


*(COMMENT)*

On May 15, 1923, Britain formally recognized the Emirate of Transjordan as a state under the leadership of Emir Abdullah.  Border transgressions by the Ikhwan (Arab nomadic tribesmen which made up the first Saudi Army) necessitated the British Army to keep an installation, with RAF Air Support, near the Capital of Amman.

The British maintained a military presence in Jordan all through the term of the Mandate; and even after the 1946 Independence.  Granted, they were in a more reduced form, and that is because the Trans-Jordan was, through cooperation and education (Tutelage) better able to stand alone.

The Arab Palestinians, West of the Jordan River, were uncooperative and declined or rejected every overture made to them, because it was exclusive to them.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 10, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, the Zionist propaganda site par excellence.  The Jewish Virtual Library is where you get your facts?  What an asshole you are. LOL
> ...



Goes to prove when the argument is lost, all that is left is to call the opposition derogatory names.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 10, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> because the Trans-Jordan was, through cooperation and education (Tutelage) better able to stand alone.


What does that have to do with the military? Was Palestine under threat by any of its neighbors?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 10, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Well, that is a matter of perception.  One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.
> 
> ...



This hate-filled racist crap you spout is getting annoying.  Like killing thousands of women and children like the Israelis do every two years ago or so  isn't barbarism you jerk off. Or Churchill gassing the Arabs in Iraq.  You are disgusting.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 10, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Well, that is a matter of perception. One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.


Link?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 10, 2016)

montelatici said:


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


Your inarticulate rants are so tedious. I wasn't aware that the Israelis killed thousands of women and children 'every two years ago". Is there any chance you could compose a coherent sentence?

You seem to be, by way of what we call a "_Monty'ism_, referring to the beatdown that was issued to the Arab-Moslems in 2014.

The Israeli thrusts into Gaza were propelled entirely by a need and willingness on the part of the Israelis to halt the rocket attacks by the islamic terrorists. Those repeated attacks were a *casus belli *_to respond._ Any Pal'istainian who chose to fight by force of arms automatically become a legitimate target. You won't accept that Israel exercised restraint during that little dalliance as you also don't understand the mayhem that Israel _could have_ unleashed. Had the IDF chosen to fight a war to its conclusion, neither HAMAS nor any credible notions about Pal'istanian autonomy would have existed. Unfortunately, Israel chose to allow the Islamic terrorist franchises yet another "do-over".

Every day that the islamic terrorists attacked Israel with rocket fire was a day for the Israeli Defense Forces to drive further into Gaza, demolishing the war-making ability of the islamic terrorists and generally informing the islamic terrorists that they had crossed a line they were unwise to cross. The fact that islamic terrorists waged war from civilian areas and intentionally caused civilian deaths is a pattern of behavior that is typical of islamic terrorists.

An action is deemed major if it has major consequences. It's deemed a mistake if those consequences are negative. Judge for yourself.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 Because palestine included trans Jordan and the British administration put the troops in a central location.  The arab muslims threatened violence from 1917 which was also a deciding factor, and if you read the remit of the mandate you will see that they were tasked with keeping the mandate free of violence and terrorism.

 BUT YOU DONT WANT TO READ THAT DO YOU AS IT SHOWS YOU CHOSE THE WRONG SIDE



Still waiting for the link or is it just another of your pipedreams


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > because the Trans-Jordan was, through cooperation and education (Tutelage) better able to stand alone.
> ...










 Yes and by its inhabitants, or cant you understand English

 From the mandate



*ART. 15.*

The Mandatory shall see that complete freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, are ensured to all. No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language. No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.

The right of each community to maintain its own schools for the education of its own members in its own language, while conforming to such educational requirements of a general nature as the Administration may impose, shall not be denied or impaired.


*ART. 17.*

The Administration of Palestine may organist on a voluntary basis the forces necessary for the preservation of peace and order, and also for the defence of the country, subject, however, to the supervision of the Mandatory, but shall not use them for purposes other than those above specified save with the consent of the Mandatory. Except for such purposes, no military, naval or air forces shall be raised or maintained by the Administration of Palestine.

Nothing in this article shall preclude the Administration of Palestine from contributing to the cost of the maintenance of the forces of the Mandatory in Palestine.

The Mandatory shall be entitled at all times to use the roads, railways and ports of Palestine for the movement of armed forces and the carriage of fuel and supplies.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

montelatici said:


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










 Who is it that puts the women and children in the line of fire, to protect their illegal weapons and terrorist fighters, those are the ones to blame for the deaths. Every time you are shown to be promoting islamonazi terrorism and violence you resort to name calling and islamonazi propaganda


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Well, that is a matter of perception. One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.
> ...








 Try the one monte uses that shows the arab muslims threatening violence, the hamas charter and the palestinian charter


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



Regretfully, Palestinians do not understand the first law of the hole.  If you're already in one --- Stop digging!


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 11, 2016)

montelatici,  P F Tinmore, et al,

This surprises me a little.  Racism and the real perceptions are entirely two different thing.

This is one of those allegations and charges that makes people want to shrink into the shadows.  In modern times, most educated people don't want to be attached with the stigma of racism; like your argument which attacks me, as opposed to addressing the content of my observation.  Suggesting that I made some distinction against the Arab Palestinian that was based on the belief that my race _(whatever that may be)_ is somehow superior to the Arab Palestinian --- is just --- unjustified.   But you can make any allegation you wish.


​
I am unafraid to state my opinion and observations; and can face this allegation directly.



montelatici said:


> This hate-filled racist crap you spout is getting annoying.  Like killing thousands of women and children like the Israelis do every two years ago or so  isn't barbarism you jerk off. Or Churchill gassing the Arabs in Iraq.  You are disgusting.


*(COMMENT)*

I do not think I used race, sex, religion, national origin, physical disability, or age as a means to perceive the nature of the Arab Palestinian as barbaric and savage.

{More to the Point Observations}

*Valentino's Ghost: Framing the Arab Image*
*We explore how US foreign policy in the Middle East is driving the media's negative portrayals of Arabs and Muslims.*
Aljazeera 23 Aug 2015 16:57 GMT Media, Middle East, Islam, Racism

*The Two Schools of Thought on Arab Violence Against Israel*
The Algemeiner: AUGUST 3, 2016 by Steve Plaut

*Perceptions of Palestine: Their Influence on U.S. Middle East Policy * by Christison, Kathleen. Berkeley:  University of California Press,  c1999 1999. *http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/kt5t1nc6tp/*​
Whether you talk about the 1968 bombing at the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the thousands of rocket and mortar launched, or the more than 50 attacks against Palestinians in just 2016, we are not talking about the magnitude of the anti-Israeli activity; not racism.  It is a matter of fact.

European eyes all Arabs became indolent, obstinate, sensual—"wild, cruel, savages or robbers, in greater or lesser degree."
Page 19:​


P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Well, that is a matter of perception. One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

_For the *"LINKS"* please see the first comment. _

It is fairly clear to me that the Jewish National Home (JNH) is the only regional resource capable of protecting future generations of the Jewish Community; the JNH is striving for a _*hygge*_ and possess a humanity that the Arab Palestinians do not demonstrate and are not capable of developing while devising was to kill more Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Phoenall said:


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


Palestine was under threat of the Palestinians


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Phoenall said:


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


We were talking about 70 years before Hamas.

You need to keep up.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> Who is it that puts the women and children in the line of fire,


Israeli propaganda,


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Not that this is untrue  ---- meaning the statement is untrue, where did you get it???



P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine was under threat of the Palestinians.


*(COMMENT)*

Arab Palestinian Leadership is a purest of examples for suicidal behavior and national self-inflected injury (Slow Death by Armed Struggle).  It bleeds the lifeblood of a nation away.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> I do not think I used race, sex, religion, national origin, physical disability, or age as a means to perceive the nature of the Arab Palestinian as barbaric and savage.


You always portray the Palestinians as lesser people with no rights. That is the Zionists perception.

"A land without people for a people with a land." They knew there were people there but they did not raise to the level of humanity to warrant having any rights or to be considered as people. The Palestinians were just something in the way that could be shoved aside like a tree or rock. Superior people deserve this land.

That is the racist view that you share.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Not that this is untrue statement is untrue, where did you git it???
> 
> ...


How does that relate to the beginning of Zionist colonization?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 They still are if you look as hamas and fatah are for ever at war with each other.

 But once again you show your inept disability to understand English and put your own spin on what is written. 

 Try reading what is written and not what you want to see written is the answer


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > I do not think I used race, sex, religion, national origin, physical disability, or age as a means to perceive the nature of the Arab Palestinian as barbaric and savage.
> ...


Was there enough land for the Jews to live there too? Why aren't you there, Tinmore? You piss and moan 24 hours a day but I have never seen any of your solutions. Come up with something instead of your Paliganda videos.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 No you are trying to change the goalposts because yo were shown to be a clown, I kept to the topic 100% and the link monte uses is from 1923 so is even on topic for your revised goalposts.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Who is it that puts the women and children in the line of fire,
> ...







 So the many reports from 2014 that show them doing this, and the fact that the UN admitted they did it are all Israeli propaganda are they ?

 Time to get real and look at the reality













 About 2,000,000 other pictures from sites that are unbiased if you want the link ?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Was Palestine under threat by any of its neighbors?



Of course she was.  You are trying to justify States using military force outside their own sovereign lands to incorporate new territory into their own sovereignty.  How many times have you told us that you can't use military force to gain territory?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 11, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> Was there enough land for the Jews to live there too?



Clearly.  Since now more than 10 million people live there.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > I do not think I used race, sex, religion, national origin, physical disability, or age as a means to perceive the nature of the Arab Palestinian as barbaric and savage.
> ...









 And you always use this LIE as this is the islamonazi means to silence the truth. At no time has anyone deprived the so called palestinians of their rights apart from themselves and the other arab muslims.  You try and use rights retroactively when you know that they did not exist at the time, which is what you see as the so called palestinians having their rights deprived or taken away.

THIS IS WHY YOU ARE ASKED TO SHOW THESE RIGHTS AND THE LAWS THAT ENACTED THEM


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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








 What Zionist colonsation, this has never been proven yet. remember that the Ottomans in 1850 invited the Jews to migrate  so from then until 1917 no Zionist colonisartion took place. Then the LoN invited the Jews to migrate so from 1917 to 1948 no colonisation took place. From 1948 to the present day the Jews followed international law and allowed in only those they deemed fit and proper ( like the USA does ) so no colonisation.


 TIME TO FACE REALITY AND PUT IT ALL INTO PERSPECTIVE, YOU JUST HATE THE JEWS AND CONSTANTLY TRY AND DEPRIVE THEM OF THEIR RIGHTS


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> Was there enough land for the Jews to live there too?


Indeed, that was  the plan. Unfortunately the Mandate and the LoN Covenant were not followed.

*ART. 6.*
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.

*ART. 7.*
The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of *Palestinian citizenship by Jews* who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Again, you are mixing-up the words.  (Colony 'v' Colonial)



P F Tinmore said:


> How does that relate to the beginning of Zionist colonization?


*(COMMENT)*

The various periods in which the Jewish People immigrated, at a trickling rate through a large-scale migration, is cyclic. 

I was answering *Posting #228*.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Phoenall said:


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


The British called it colonization. The Zionists called it colonization. The Palestinians, and others including historians, call it colonization. The facts on the ground show colonization.

And an internet troll says it is not.

Oh who to believe, who to believe.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Again, you are mixing-up the words.  (Colony 'v' Colonial)
> 
> ...


So, what threat to Palestine were the Palestinians?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Was there enough land for the Jews to live there too?
> ...



As all of this has been addressed previously for you, repeatedly and tediously, it's concerning that you still don't understand.

There is a 1400 year long history of Arabs-Moslems being unable to co-exist with adherents to other religions. You should know your koranology to understand the revulsion that Islamics have for Judaism.

The Jewish people chose self-determination. You have already acknowledged that self-determination is an inherent right of all peoples (peoples). You do recall you earlier struggle with people vs. peoples, right?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Arabs-Moslems called their invasion and colonization of the area gee-had or waqf; an entitlement from Muhammud (swish). Arabs-Moslems failed to make the Islamist Middle East _judenrein, _not that they gave stopped trying.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

You don't know this.   You don't know this at all.



P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Was there enough land for the Jews to live there too?
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Arabs of Palestine _(as defined by the Allied Powers)_ have no real connection to either the Covenant or the Mandate.  They were not a party to either.  How the Covenant and Mandate were interpreted and honored, was not a matter for the Arab Palestinians to be concerned.

So maybe the way in which the population of the former Enemy Occupied Territory was treated turned-out much too lenient; and should have been dealt with in a more draconian Fashion.   

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


If you put politics aside, there are very few problems among the different religions.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> The Arabs of Palestine _(as defined by the Allied Powers)_ have no real connection to either the Covenant or the Mandate.


Therefore the Palestinians could be shoved aside like they did not exist.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Was there enough land for the Jews to live there too?
> ...












 Because the covenant did not apply in this case, it only applied to the LoN.

Jewish immigration was facilitated until the UN took over control of the LoN mandates, and until that time the Jews were given full palestinian citizenship.

AGAIN YOU DONT READ WHAT YOU POST AND SO GET IT WRONG


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Hummm,



P F Tinmore said:


> If you put politics aside, there are very few problems among the different religions.


*(COMMENT)*

I suppose its a matter of perspective:: depending upon if you are holding the sword or the one about to be beheaded.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Hummm,
> 
> ...


Indeed, politics.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







It all depends on which interpretation you use for colonisation. try using the one you dont want to use and see how it alters your interpretation.



 Now which nation did these Zionists come from to invade and colonise, as I cant find any nation of Zion




 By the way the history books and common usage of the term in English says that it is not colonisation, but an invitation to migrate and become citizens


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Now that's pretty funny. Arabs-Moslems solve the "very few problems among the different religions" dilemma by expelling those different religions. That dynamic even applies to the different versions of Islamism. Try to find Shiite or Ahmadiyya in the KSA for example.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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










 As long as the muslims are allowed to be in charge and making the rules and laws. Take anything away from them and they become extremely violent as opposed to just moderately violent. Look at recent history for examples


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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


Indeed, that's so silly. The separation of one's head from their torso via a knife, sword or shotgun blast to the droning accompaniment of Allah Akbar is far less politics than it is religion, one, particular relgion.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Arabs of Palestine _(as defined by the Allied Powers)_ have no real connection to either the Covenant or the Mandate.
> ...










 Again you tell LIES. They were constantly invited to take part, hardly shoving them aside. But they demanded it all on their terms or they would become extremely violent, you would think they would have given up by now after losing every single time. Now you will claim their rights were deprived without giving any indication of which rights or instances


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> But they demanded it all on their terms


The Palestinians wanted all of Palestine?

WOW, how dare they?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > But they demanded it all on their terms
> ...



Not quite.  The Arab Palestinians wanted all of Palestine.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > But they demanded it all on their terms
> ...


Absentee landlords in Egypt, Syria and Lebanon were the largest landowners, not so-called Pal'istanian squatters. Those absentee landowners sold large tracts to _The Zionists_™

Arab-Moslem squatters you call "Pal'istanians" may have wanted all of the land area for themselves, but, they didn't own the land area and later, refused to take part in, or cooperate, in the processes of the mandate. 

How does it feel to want?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Hummm,
> 
> ...


Indeed, politics.


Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


The Palestinian Muslims, Christians, and Jews did not want a Jewish state.

I stand with the people without regard of religion.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



_"The Palestinian Muslims, Christians, and Jews did not want a Jewish state_.... because I say so"


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


The Ottoman Empire had a different land system. It did not match the western model.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


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


Its true.

Look it up.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



[In a deep, booming voice-over] I stand with the people without regard of religion..._*because I am Tinmoreman.*_


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Of course, dear. The Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese absentee landowners should have known that decades later, you would be posting on an Internet message board re-writing history and retroactively revising land use laws.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 11, 2016)

The Jewish people did not want a Jewish State.  Oh please.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



I looked it up. I found no indication your "....because I say so" commandment appears in the historical record.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


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



Still propagating the Zionist propaganda.  But lets' post the facts as per the UN:


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

montelatici said:


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



Still cutting and pasting the same debunked cutting and pasting.

You're befuddled as to who controlled the land. The UN did not.

From the official Ottoman land records:
Turkey transfers Ottoman land records to Palestinian Authority

Even before 1917, Jewish and Zionist institutions had purchased large tracts of land in Palestine from absentee landlords, who lived mainly in Syria and Lebanon. These landlords had previously leased their property to local farmers, but were happy to sell it for the right price, without giving a thought to their tenant farmers. Nevertheless, Palestinians view these sales as more legitimate than those that took place during the British occupation that began in 1917.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land. Some of this land was later sold or transferred to pre-state Jewish institutions. Other portions belonged to the Muslim waqf (religious trust), and these, according to Islamic law, cannot be sold. However, there was no orderly registration process; ownership was determined primarily using records such as tax payments.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Shusha said:


> The Jewish people did not want a Jewish State.  Oh please.


Why do these Orthodox Jews declare that they are living under Israeli occupation?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The Jewish people did not want a Jewish State.  Oh please.
> ...


Why do these Arab Christians declare they are being dispossessed by Peaceful Inner Strugglers?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


> Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land.


Indeed, The Ottoman system was more of a land right system than a land ownership system. The people had the right to work land. This right could be bought, sold or inherited. What was called state land was actually communal land that was "owned" by a village. No one person had a deed to that land but there was a collective right to that land. (It is interesting to note the the Venezuela constitution recognizes the communal land of its Indian populations. That guarantees their ownership without the possession of land deeds.)

It was a mix of systems. Trying to fit the land rights system into a land ownership system was like pounding a square peg into a round hole.

BTW, the state lands were ceded to the government of Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


That is by people who Hamas arrests.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land.
> ...


Indeed, the so-called Pal'istanians owned very little of the land you claim was _stolen by the Zionists_™. As the official Ottoman records show, it was foreigners from Egypt, Syria and Lebanon (absentee landowners) who controlled the majority of the land, large tracts of which were purchased by The Zionists™ and by Jews. 

Trying to re-write the land ownership system retroactively is like reading a Tinmore post where he tries to re-write history.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Who can argue with Islamic terrorist justice? 

Certainly not these folks:


----------



## Shusha (Dec 11, 2016)

Just a reminder that private land ownership actually has nothing at all to do with sovereignty.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeed, The Ottoman system was more of a land right system than a land ownership system. The people had the right to work land. This right could be bought, sold or inherited. What was called state land was actually communal land that was "owned" by a village.



I don't believe this is correct.  Miri land could be cultivated and passed down to heirs in perpetuity, but in the absence of heirs or lack of cultivation it reverted to the government.  I don't believe that miri land could be sold.  Please provide link if I am wrong on this. 

Edited to add:  Ah.  I see I have misread.  The right to cultivate the land could be bought and sold.  Yes, this is correct.  But only with the government's permission.  

Still, the land was not "owned" by the village.  The right to cultivate the land was.  The ownership still rested with the government.  The right to cultivate was not a purchase of the land.  



> BTW, the state lands were ceded to the government of Palestine.


Please support this claim.  How and when was state land ceded to the government of Palestine?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


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


And Nutandyahoo said that Hamas will pay a heavy price. For what? killing his spies?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



It was your Hamas heroes who did the killing. Whether the people killed by Hamas -_Men in Ski Masks_- were spies is anyone's guess. Islamic terrorists aren't real sticklers for due process or evidentiary proceedings. Just hustle the accused to the curbline and blow their brains out.

Can I get an Allahu Akbar brothas' and sistas'?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Shusha said:


> Just a reminder that private land ownership actually has nothing at all to do with sovereignty.


That is true. The homeless man in NYC has the same rights to his country as a farm owner in Iowa. They are both the people of the place. A man who rents an apartment has the same right to country as the man who owns the building.

Israel's propaganda that says that Palestinians have no rights because they did not own land is hogwash. It is just a red herring.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


What is your point?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> What is your point?



The same point you would make if I said the Jewish Palestinians wanted all of Palestine.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 11, 2016)

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not true and you know it.  And it is important to remember that the intent over time becomes muddled.  In the early 20th Century --- some Jews made a distinction between a "Jewish State" and that of a "State of Jews."

I've seen this distinction before, but I'm not sure if there is a true difference or a relevance in the distinction.



P F Tinmore said:


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


*(COMMENT)*

While there are always some faction of a sampled population that goes against the grain, I do not think that the predominant world-wide remainder of the Jewish Population had this mind in 1945 thru 1948.  I'm not sure you would have the numbers to say that today.

With the survivors of Auschwitz-Birkenau, Bełżec, Chełmno, Majdanek, MalyTreblinka, Trostinets, Sajmište,
Sobibór and Treblinka, and how the Germans through the false color of law, captured, raped, tortured and exterminated Jews by the train cars, --- I'm not sure exactly when you might claim the numbers.  But of course, there is this claim that the entire event was a conspiracy, and that the discovery of the camps and the testimony of the survivors is contrived.

Today, your claim makes no difference.  While there are 22 Arab League nations that represent 422 Million people, the world-wide number of Jewish people is less than 18 Million.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 11, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This is not true and you know it.  And it is important to remember that the intent over time becomes muddled.  In the early 20th Century --- some Jews made a distinction between a "Jewish State" and that of a "State of Jews."
> 
> ...


Uhhh, OK.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 11, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This is not true and you know it.  And it is important to remember that the intent over time becomes muddled.  In the early 20th Century --- some Jews made a distinction between a "Jewish State" and that of a "State of Jews."
> 
> ...



The question is, why did the Muslim and Christian Palestinians have to be punished for crimes committed by Germans?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

montelatici said:


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



The question is, why pose a question when it presupposes an answer?

Why are the Jewish people punished for the crimes committed by Moslems and Christians?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



I see you are losing it.  LOL


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


I see you are so befuddled, you're left to pointless prattle, LOL.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 11, 2016)

You are so full of shit it is entertaining to watch you wriggle and squirm while typing nonsense.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 11, 2016)

montelatici said:


> You are so full of shit it is entertaining to watch you wriggle and squirm while typing nonsense.



I have noticed a failure on your part to make any attempt to support your false and naïve claims.

In 2006, the Iranian bought-and-paid-for Hizbollocks crossed Israel's northern border and kidnapped two soldiers, triggering a massive Israeli retaliation. 

Hm, let's see now:

§  Syria, an aggressive despotic state allied with Iran:

§  Which tyrannized Lebanon for decades,

§  Which is implacably hostile toward Israel,

§  Which is known to support Hizbollah and other Islamic terror groups,

§  Whose agents of insurrection have been captured inside Iraq,


More to the point, let's also address your ignorant claim about Hezbollah being formed as a "response to the Israeli incursion into southern Lebanon," but here's the reality. The group was actually formed in 1979, three years prior to the incursion, when Ayatollah Khomeini came to power in Iran. It was an effort to duplicate an Iranian-style theocracy in Lebanon that was the motivating force, not Israel's effort to rid southern Lebanon of that viper's nest of PLO thugs.

Hezbollah should be an object lesson to anybody who thinks that appeasing terrorists can work. After the bombing of our Marine barracks in Lebanon, this country made the decision to cut and run. That the Marines were sent there in the first place, against the advice of the Israelis, was a major error. But allowing Syria and Iran, the patron saints of Hizbollocks, to go unpunished was thought by many to have emboldened Osama bin Laden and set the stage for al-Qaeda's subsequent attacks.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 11, 2016)

montelatici said:


> You are so full of shit it is entertaining to watch you wriggle and squirm while typing nonsense.



Are you speaking about "shit" again.  Maybe it is time for you to change your Depends.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 11, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > You are so full of shit it is entertaining to watch you wriggle and squirm while typing nonsense.
> ...




You haven't a clue.  Hezbollah would not exist had the Israelis not invaded and occupied Southern Lebanon.  It is the attacks on people that create the resistance.  

"It emerged with the help of Iran during the Israeli occupation of Lebanon in the early 1980s..."

Profile: Lebanon's Hezbollah movement - BBC News

And, since Osama Bin Ladin considered Shia worse than Jews, the rest of your bullshit just magnifies your ignorance. You are just full shit.


----------



## theliq (Dec 11, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > So, if someone quoted Electronic Intifada as the source supporting an assertion you would accept it as a neutral source?  You are not only a hypocrite, but also a dimwit.
> ...


You have called me worse Hoss,just sayin and I know why.....Because I can never be defeated much like the Palestinians.....you and others just use this type of DROSS because you are trying to deny your guilt......you Plastic Synthetico's......have a Mental Disorder....don't blame Monte,Tinnie,Penny en al for your Disgusting PAST AND FUTURE.....You Guys will NEVER Change,not just because you have been Zionist Brainwashed but moreover You All Have Become BRAIN-DEAD.......your mate steve,and by the way,where's the Beers Hossie,where's the  Beers???


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 11, 2016)

theliq said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Take your meds, Steve, and maybe you wouldn't blabber on with your nonsense.  BTW, beer doesn't go good with medications so stay sober.


----------



## theliq (Dec 12, 2016)

Hossfly said:


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


"meds" here Hoss are  BRAND OF sanitary napkin.......A Jewish(I realised later he must have been a Plastico Zionista) Doctor once gave me some Pills,but I couldn't take em because they were marked "Zionist Brain Pills" and  looked and smelt like SHIT.

Enjoyed you post as Usual Hoss,you are one Great man and despite all flaws but I Love you man...Now where is that BEER?????!!!!!!!!steve


----------



## Hollie (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



I'm afraid you remain as clueless as ever. 

*What are Hezbollah's origins?*

http://www.cfr.org/lebanon/hezbollah-k-hizbollah-hizbullah/p9155

Hezbollah (or "Party of God") emerged during Lebanon's fifteen-year-long civil war (1975–1990) in the aftermath of Israel's invasion in 1982 and subsequent occupation. Israel aimed to expel Palestinian militants operating in southern Lebanon, but the move galvanized a faction of disenfranchised Shiites to take up arms in support of an Iranian-style clerical regime. In its infancy, the movement obtained critical financial support and training from Iran's Revolutionary Guards. Suicide attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut in October 1983 (258 Americans killed) furthered the group's image as leaders of the Shiite resistance. Just months later, President Ronald Reagan withdrew U.S. Marines who had been deployed to Lebanon as part of a multinational peacekeeping force.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

teddyearp said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


That's "...*loosely* based on true events"


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.
> 
> This image of the Arab is still with use today. Whether we picture them settling bombs off in restaurants, suicide bombers on a crowed beach, kidnapping and murdering teenagers, or sending a laser-guided missile into the side of a school bus, the image that the name of the Arab Palestinians invokes is one of sheer barbarism.



All of which they learned from the Irgun, Lehi, Palmach and Hagana.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.
> ...



You're history is the befuddled kind. Arab-Moslem savagery against the planet began shortly after the death of Islam's inventor when a fascist politico-religious ideology was unleashed on humanity.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Was Palestine under threat by any of its neighbors?
> ...



Drivel. Palestine was only ever under threat  from Zionist terrorism and land grabbing and later ethnic cleansing which forced the neighbouring states to intervene militarily to prevent. The only actor to illegally gain territory both in 1948 and 1967 and every year since, has been Zionist Israel. Admittedly, Abdullah of Jordan had designs on the West Bank in collusion with the Zionists; much like the Hitler/Stalin, Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of 1939 to partition Poland and wonder of wonders, the Jordanians were the only army not to attack the Zionists, until the Zionists tried to capture Jerusalem in violation of their agreement.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> How the Covenant and Mandate were interpreted and honored, was not a matter for the Arab Palestinians to be concerned.



You mean Just like the Poles in 1939? They were not "concerned" with the Molotov-Ribbentropp pact. How very imperialist of you.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Why shouldn't they, it was, after all *their* homeland?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



I think you will find that _Zionist Israel_™ gained land in 1948 and 1967 after _Zionist Israel_™ was attacked by _The_ _Islamist Entity_™. It seems odd to me that _The_ _Islamist Entity_™ would continue attacks against _Zionist Israel_™ after suffering humiliating losses and expect _Zionist Israel_™ would happily return lands used as buffer against said _Islamist Entity_™ such that _The_ _Islamist Entity_™ could get a "do-over" and attack _Zionist Israel_™ again... and again.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

Shusha said:


> The Jewish people did not want a Jewish State.  Oh please.



They didn't, as it happens, at least prior to Zionist indoctrination and intimidation. Even in 1945 most wanted to go to the US rather than Palestine.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You're suggesting absentee landowners from Egypt, Syria and Syria called your mythical "country of Pal'istan" *their* homeland?

Chuckle.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > But they demanded it all on their terms
> ...








 Indeed they already had 78% in the form of trans Jordan and this was not enough for them, or to put it another way they had 99.9% of the failed Ottoman Empire lands as their reward for helping the allies win the war against the Ottomans and had agreed that the Jews could have their homeland on the rest. Proving that muslims can not be trusted at all


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The Jewish people did not want a Jewish State.  Oh please.
> ...








 LINK and from an unbiased non partisan source


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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








 LINK ?    from an unbiased and non partisan source


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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








 Not that much different as it was of two types

 Full title to the land that allowed you to do what you wanted within the law

 rented or leased that had stipulations and covenants, one of which was the land was to be cultivated at all times. Allowing goats to wander around it was not seen as cultivation. This is why the land was not arab muslim as the majority was leased to the arab muslims but the Ottoman's still held title


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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







 I have and cant find anything other than islamonazi propaganda to back up your claim


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici said:


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








 Yes lets, and you can start by removing this map that is not an official UN document, it is older than the UN itself if you look


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The Jewish people did not want a Jewish State.  Oh please.
> ...









 Because they are ultra extremists that are mooching of anyone they can. If Israel ceased to exist they would die out because they are too lazy to work. These are the anti semitic Jews that in one post you attack for their actions against arab children, then praise in the next for their words on Israeli policies.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Under Ottoman rule, a substantial portion of the land in Palestine was registered as state land.
> ...







 LINK ?    as this was not Ottoman land law


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Indeed, The Ottoman system was more of a land right system than a land ownership system. The people had the right to work land. This right could be bought, sold or inherited. What was called state land was actually communal land that was "owned" by a village.
> ...








 When the mandate took over and the government of palestine was the mandatory under the control of the LoN. In 1948 this passed to the Jews when they claimed independence. The arab muslims have yet to be given the same status


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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








 You can prove they were spies, or is this just another racial dig at the JEWS.The word is the majority were fatah members eliminated because they opposed the hamas government way of doing things


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Just a reminder that private land ownership actually has nothing at all to do with sovereignty.
> ...









 You cant use US laws outside of the US, they do not have any power. You have the right to be armed, try bringing your gun to the UK and see what happens. You might still be trying to extract it 6 months after being thrown to the ground, tazered numerous times and then handcuffed and frog marched to a cell. Your consul will tell you to admit the offence and accept the sentence of being banned from travelling for life


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








THAT THE ARAB MUSLIMS WANTED IT ALL AND WERE PREPARED TO USE EXTREME VIOLENCE TO GET IT.

 THIS IS WHAT YOU SUPPORT AND DEFEND


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici said:


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








Who did they side with from 1933 until 1945 and did all they could to hinder the Allies efforts during WW2. They were just as culpable as the Catholics who also sided with the Nazis and were known to have gladly entered the camps to help dispose of the Jews and other untermensch. The mufti demanded that Hitler stop sending Jews to palestine as his people could not keep up with the numbers


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.
> ...









 So who was doing it for the muslims before these groups were invented ?


Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 So why is 78% of palestine peaceful and not under any threat from Isreal ?

 And why did Jordan pass a law stealing all the Jewish land and revoking their title ?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 Was it, then maybe you can find the treaty that signed sovereignty to them after 1099 and before the present day. It was Ottoman land until 1917 and then it was LoN land after that, it was never arab muslim land


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> Indeed they already had 78% in the form of trans Jordan


Who do you mean by they? The owner of orange groves in Jaffa? Or had a factory in Haifa? Or a shop, theatre, or farm?

You sound like you are dividing a pizza, not carving up a people's homeland.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


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


You forget that Fatah lost the elections because they suck.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Pffft, sour grapes.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Do you mean the 78% that Israel did not steal?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Indeed they already had 78% in the form of trans Jordan
> ...








 The arab muslims calling themselves palestinians of course, they were given 99.9% of the former Ottoman Empire and still wanted the 0.1% granted to the Jews.

 It was never the arab muslims homeland as they were nomads that followed the crops, they never put down roots or settled until after 1948 when their nomadic route was cut with the introduction of Israel


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 WRONG they lost because they put too many eggs in too many baskets and split the vote too many ways


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 WRONG IT IS FACTS AND YOU KNOW IT


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...








 HOW CAN YOU STEAL WHAT IS YOURS BY INTERNATIONAL LAW ?

WHERE IS THE TREATY HANDING THE LAND TO THE ARAB MUSLIMS ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


It is also irrelevant.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Who do you mean by Arab Muslims?


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici,  et al,

I'm not sure that you've read the postings.



montelatici said:


> The question is, why did the Muslim and Christian Palestinians have to be punished for crimes committed by Germans?


*(ANSWER)*

There is no one single reason this is wrong.

First, the decision by the Allied Powers to proceed with the establishment of the Jewish National Home (JNH) was not a matter of punishment.

Second, the JNH was decided to be established in Enemy Occupied Territory.  Not the Territory in which the population favored the Allied Powers.

The territory in which the JHN was to be established, was territory in which the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic renounced, in favor of the Principal Allied Powers, all rights and title.​This decision was not a decision based totally on a religious issue.  The Allied Powers made the decision in the recognized need to protect the Jewish People as a culture from further abuse by unscrupilous leaders; using the color of law and the weight of the majority that rules as a means to further persecute the Jewish People.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bleipriester (Dec 12, 2016)

So the topic is they refuse to have their own land generously offered by Israel?


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Valid questions.  Can't wait to see the Pali supporter replies.  
Hello!  Anybody home?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Israeli bullshit extraordinaire.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> First, the decision by the Allied Powers to proceed with the establishment of the Jewish National Home (JNH) was not a matter of punishment.



Tell that to the Palestinians.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


The Palestinians became the citizens of Palestine by international law, the Treaty of Lausanne, and the Palestinian citizenship order.

I guess that means that Palestine belongs to some criminals out of Europe.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici,  et al,
> 
> I'm not sure that you've read the postings.
> 
> ...


Your fascism is showing.

Power politics overriding the rights of a people.


----------



## GHook93 (Dec 12, 2016)

GLASNOST said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > For Palestinians it's all or nothing.  So nothing it shall be.
> ...



First, that is a weak argument, but no one expects less from the Elder of Zion believer.

Second, but you still decided to respond. Typical antisemitic leftist.

Third, but again you still responded 

Fourth, you say you don't have enough information on the topic, but you state it is a lie!  Troll much?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## GHook93 (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJ is not he sharpest knife in the drawer, he has posted that there are Muslim Archbishops. He probably never read the article himself.



Pot calling the kettle black Smokey! 

You spew you antisemitic revisionism as truth
and you attack other people's intelligence. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## GHook93 (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



That is so not true! You truly are a moron! 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## GLASNOST (Dec 12, 2016)

GHook93 said:


> First, that is a weak argument, but no one expects less from the Elder of Zion believer.
> Second, but you still decided to respond. Typical antisemitic leftist.
> Third, but again you still responded
> Fourth, you say you don't have enough information on the topic, but you state it is a lie!  Troll much?
> ...


I am most interested in your final notice. If you spend a little money, you can purchase a quality leather pouch  and you won't need to keep your iPhone up your ass any more.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 Only because it destroys your POV and islamonazi Jew hatred


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Exactly what I said, the people you are defending and supporting when they murder children to steal land that was never theirs. Those arab muslims that now call themselves palestinians who have no claim to any of the lands being illegal immigrants and deserters from the arab league forces. No treaty issued by the Ottomans at at any time up until they signed over full control and sovereignty of the land in 1917. No treaty from the LoN who became the sovereign rulers from 1917. No annexation needed as the treaty did all that in one fell swoop


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger,  et al,

The Israelis have control.



Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Whatever it is that the Arab Palestinians want, they have to present a solution to the Israelis.  All this rhetoric about who stole what when is un-useful. 

Failure to deal with the reality of the day with almost guarantee that the Arab Palestinian will come-out losing more than they already have.

Most Respectfully,
R.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger,  et al,

You don't say.



Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > One of those perceptions was the savagery for witch the Arabs were known.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Terrorism have been around for much longer that this.  Terrorism predates Alexander the Great.   This line of thought gets you nowhere.  

Don't evolve, see what that gets you.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

Bleipriester said:


> So the topic is they refuse to have their own land generously offered by Israel?








 WRONG they refused to have 78% of palestine generously offered by the LoN, and instead decided they wanted it all or would die trying


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







WRONG as this goes back to before Israel was accepted as the Jewish national home. Your answer to everything that destroys your POV and stance is to claim Israeli bullshit or some such profanity, shows you are losing the argument


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > First, the decision by the Allied Powers to proceed with the establishment of the Jewish National Home (JNH) was not a matter of punishment.
> ...








 And they LIE more than you do so you would not get a proper answer


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Try again the palestinians were the Jews until 1960 when arafat stole the name, so they became the citizens of the part of palestine destined for the Jewish national home. The arab muslims became citizens of the part of palestine named trans Jordan and that was their national home. By citizen of palestine the LoN meant citizen of the mandate of palestine


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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








That would be yours and the islamonazi's who are followers of fascist principles


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Whatever it is that the Arab Palestinians want, they have to present a solution to the Israelis.



Or perhaps these Zionist "supermen" can get their collective "superior intelligences" together and present a solution to the poor befuddled Palestinians, given the number of Nobel prizes they've accumulated over the years and their superior level of development (18th I think you said it was)?


----------



## Challenger (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> You don't say.
> 
> ...



Depends how you view terrorism, certainly the use of terror tactics in warfare was well known to the Assyrians, 5000 years ago, but if by terrorism you mean a small group of fanatics killing in order to further their political/religious agenda, then look no further than the Jewish Sicarii, the first recorded terrorist group in history and if you believe Zionist historiography, direct descendants of the Irgun, Lehi, Palmach and Hagana. 

Are you saying Jewish people haven't evolved?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> By citizen of palestine the LoN meant citizen of the mandate of palestine


Link?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



It was also the Jewish homeland.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 12, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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



You mean like the Palestinian right to thank Israel with rocket missiles from a new terrorist base for giving the Pali's a Jew free Gaza?


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 12, 2016)

Challenger,  et al,

And here again, is an example of trying to play the victim.  

Individual Mental Capability and Intelligence ("supermen" --- "superior intelligences") are not characteristics that we can definitely explain the source; although we think it is primarily an inherited quality.  There are things that can definitely detract from the ability to use the higher order mental functions two or more standard deviations above the norm, in given areas of understanding.  But again, we don't know how to even measure intelligence.  It is one of those attributes that we know it when we see it.  But just as we can spot influential thinkers across various disciplines _(Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Archimedes, Hypatia of Alexandria, Pythagoras, Leonardo da Vinci, Galileo, Kepler, Isaac Newton, Mozart, Max Plank, Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein, etc...)_, so it is that we can spot obvious voids in contributions. 



Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever it is that the Arab Palestinians want, they have to present a solution to the Israelis.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Up until ≈ the 13th Century _(the Islamic Golden Age was the 8th - 13th Century)_, the Arabs World was the center of technical science and mathematics.  Something definitely happened.  The Islamic World consists of of more then 20% of the global population.  But after the 13th Century, contributes almost nothing.  In the last 100 years, the Jewish Population (15B) has contributed more to civilization than the entire Global Muslim Population (400B) in the last 7 Centuries.

We do not know if the correlation has anything to do with productivity of the Islamic culture, but clearly, it can be said that their is a gap (World-wide) that directly correlates to the lack of productivity in the Arab Palestinians.  And that world-wide observation has nothing to do with Israeli Occupation.  It is the same observation everywhere.

Given that the Israelis have presented the opportunity to the Arab Palestinians to make the first overtures for peace, would it not be in the best interest of the "poor befuddled Palestinians" _(as you describe them)_ to put their best foot forward?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> And here again, is an example of trying to play the victim.
> 
> ...



Fabulous reply.  For some the truth hurts.  Yet it remains true beyond any rational denial.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 12, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


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


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 12, 2016)

Fabulous reply ROCCOR.. For some the truth hurts. Yet it remains true beyond any rational denial.[/QUOTE

Makes me wonder how many Palestinians & their supporters have ever read the works of Avicenna, Averroes. al-Kindi, al-Farabi or the Mu'tazillites? Brilliant Muslims of faith, peace worldly love & philosophy that influenced both Jewish & Christian thinking.

And today we have Palestinians to replace them.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> And here again, is an example of trying to play the victim.
> 
> ...



You do realize that Steve Jobs' father was a Syrian Muslim.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 12, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> And here again, is an example of trying to play the victim.
> 
> ...



Nicely stated, Rocco. I do have one quibble regarding Islam's alleged "golden age". 

Islam’s “golden age” was not because of some sweeping affinity for science and innovation, It was because Islam was wealthy with the plunder of recent conquest. Once the rapid expansion into newly conquered territories ended and Moslems had to depend on being productive and innovative themselves, they discovered that they were not up to the task. 

Let's not forget that the Islamic Empire collapsed from the inside. 

So what happened? 

Al-Ghazali published his book, “_The Incoherence of the Philosophers_.” That’s what happened. And Islam imploded as it abandoned rationalism, science and free inquiry. Its not just that the Europeans progressed faster than Islam. It’s also that Islam did not progress at all.

This is why the Islamic world has grown progressively backward over the last 700 years. It has fled from science. It has fled from philosophy. It has fled from uncomfortable truth, while the rest of the world embraced that truth and became progressively more powerful, wealthy and stable.

The Moslems were great collectors of preexisting knowledge, but they were pretty awful at innovation. There is almost nothing original that we can attribute to them. The Moslems were an empire of stamp collectors.

Second is Islam's inability to reconcile its own theology with the reality of its circumstance. The dissonance between the Islamic conception of Moslems as being specially loved by Allah, and the circumstances of a modern world in which (by every objective measure) it looks like Allah doesn’t like Moslems very much generates frustration and unreason. Islam understands that its “golden age” evaporated centuries ago, and they do not understand why. If Islam is correct, then history must be wrong, and the active effort to reconcile the two demands violent change to the _status quo_. 

Third is its fundamental aversion to innovation, (_bid’a_). It has characterized progress as heresy, and as such is dogmatically unequipped to deal with a world that has outstripped the values of its 7th century Arab Warlord founder. 

And lastly is a widely held theological tradition within Islam of the use of violence as a proper exercise of Allah’s will. Whether any particular individual Muslim hold these views or not, there is in fact a significant movement within Islam that understands the koran and the Sunnah to allow the violent imposition of Islamic ideology on the rest of the world.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici said:


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


You do realize you're pointless.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici,  et al,

Well, only part of this implication is true!



montelatici said:


> You do realize that Steve Jobs' father was a Syrian Muslim.





			
				9to5Mac said:
			
		

> In the tumult following Steve Jobs’ resignation, the _New York Post_ and others (here’s a good one translated from Arabic) have been digging up interviews with Steve Jobs’ biological father, Abdulfattah John Jandali, who is a Syrian-born Vice President of a casino in Reno, Nevada.  He’s an 80-year old workaholic who is trying to avoid retirement at all costs (sounds familiar).
> 
> *The Syrian immigrant says he is overcome with guilt for his treatment of Jobs and only learned recently that the child he gave up for adoption was the famous CEO.*


*(COMMENT)*

Are you saying that Steve Jobs grew-up under a Muslim cultural family???

I was given the impression that Steve Job's father gave the son up for adoption _(adopted by Clara and Paul Jobs)_.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Dec 12, 2016)

Does it matter?  Many Palestinians were Christian.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Does it matter?  Many Palestinians were Christian.


Many were not.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 12, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Does it matter?  Many Palestinians were Christian.
> ...



So what.  The Jews expelled native Christians.


----------



## Bleipriester (Dec 12, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > So the topic is they refuse to have their own land generously offered by Israel?
> ...


You are just eager to elevate this baseless opinion piece to the truth. In reality, it is Israel that rejects a two state solution and want it all. We see you guys screaming there is already a Palestine, Jordan while Israel builds more settlements.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 12, 2016)

montelatici said:


> So what.  The Jews expelled native Christians.



The irony....


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever it is that the Arab Palestinians want, they have to present a solution to the Israelis.
> ...








 Been done thousands of times and all the arab muslims do is impose pre conditions that stall the talks and then blame the Jews for not giving in to their demands.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

Challenger said:


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








No that arab muslims calling themselves palestinians are the ones that have not evolved, on the contrary they have regressed


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > By citizen of palestine the LoN meant citizen of the mandate of palestine
> ...









Read the mandate of palestine and the order in council, they have both been supplied quite a lot of times


----------



## Challenger (Dec 13, 2016)

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



If there is such a thing it would be situated either in modern Turkey or Iraq.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> And here again, is an example of trying to play the victim.
> 
> ...









 Having worked with muslims I would put it down to the praying 5 times a day that interferes with productivity. Imagine a constant process that is brought to a halt repetitively because operators have to pray. The stopping of the process cost money in lost production, the start up after a stop cost money  in lost production. The output is reduced and the process becomes "toxic" due to increasing use of raw materials. This is why arab nations employ ex pats to work their processing plants for them, and pay high wages to keep them. They cant put safety on the cards otherwise, and this alone is a reason to stop them from having Nuclear power stations


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

Bleipriester said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...









 It is not an opinion piece it is the truth based on evidence freely available and often posted on this board. The LoN partitioned palestine giving 78% to the arab muslims. They demanded it all and threatened violence if they did not get it, which they made good on. You are correct in your assumption that there is already a " palestine" and the "palestinians" tried to take control by force. The King of Jordan ordered punitive punishments that resulted in as many as 50,000 refugees being killed, then cut them adrift with no support.

 You have never produced a valid link to Israel denying a two state solution, while there are tens of thousands of valid links to the arab muslims refusing a two state solution


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > So what.  The Jews expelled native Christians.
> ...








 Doesn't the moron know that the original Christians were the Jews who followed a wandering Rabbi called Jesus and were expelled by the Roman Catholics who stole the religion as theirs


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...











 WHY ?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

montelatici said:


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









 Proving what, apart from you will clutch at any straws to win a point


----------



## Bleipriester (Dec 13, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


There is massive evidence. When Israel demanded to be recognized in order to start two-states talk, Hamas recognized Israel. The  Israel started the 2006 war in order to not to have two-state talks. Quite simple.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 13, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


I have and they do not say what you think. And you always duck out when I ask you to quote the passage.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

Bleipriester said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Bleipriester said:
> ...






LINKS ?     as this is only found on the hate sites and is not supported by any evidence.

What war did Israel start in 2006 then, as the arab muslims were firing illegal weapons instead of talking peace as they agreed in 1999


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 Here you go, once again I am proving that you are a liar



*ART. 7.*

 The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Article 21: Definitions

For the purpose of this Order:

1. The expression* “Palestine” includes the territories to which the mandate for Palestine applies, *except such parts of the territories comprised in Palestine to the east of Jordan and the Dead Sea as were defined by Order of the High Commissioner dated the first of September 1922.





 LOSER


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 13, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


It was the Palestine Mandate.

Of course it would be in Palestine.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 13, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



PF, you really should put that Phuckwit on ignore; he never posts anything worth responding to or taking seriously...unless of course you enjoy pulling his chain...in which case, enjoy yourself!


----------



## Challenger (Dec 13, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> And here again, is an example of trying to play the victim.



Correct! Poor Zionist Israel, no matter what we do, our collective intellect has found it impossible to come up with a solution to the problem that we colonised another people's lands, slaughtered and drove them out, and now they're angry with us, boo hoo. Maybe we should have accepted the peace offer from Syria after 1948? You know, the one that offered to absorb the Palestinian refugees in exchange for bits of territory we'd conquered. Nah, Zionists bleat about peace  to the gullible west while continuing to steal Palestinian land...oh, here's a good one; lets accuse the Palestinians of trying to ethnically cleanse our "settlers" from their state...

Another rambling response from RoccoR that avoids the problem and distorts history in pursuit of his agenda. Wonder how the "West" would have fared had Ogedei lived another few years?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 13, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


In the geographic region called Pal'istan. Not your invented, mythical "country of Disney.... I mean 'Pal'istan"


----------



## Hollie (Dec 13, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > And here again, is an example of trying to play the victim.
> ...


Yet another feverish, saliva-slinging tirade. It's always worth a chuckle when the knuckleheads launch into the "stolen lands™ canards without understanding that the absentee land owners who controlled large tracts of land sold large portions of the property to _The Zionist Entity_™

Still, I do miss the high pitch screeching about _The Genocide of the Poor, Oppressed Pal'istanians™_.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 13, 2016)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



 The Zionists managed to buy less than 7% of the land by 1947, the rest was owned by Palestinian Muslims and Christians in 1947, as the UN commissioned, "Survey of Palestine"  stated. You keep barking propaganda through your snout, no one believes it.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...









 So you admit that you were wrong again


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 13, 2016)

montelatici said:


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









WRONG it was owned by absentee Ottoman landlords

And nice of you to present the arab muslim name for the land  FILASTIN


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 13, 2016)

montelatici said:


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



Now this is an official documentation of "the Zionist crocodile to Palestinian Arabs."  Must be that Muslim archbishop who Monte got it from.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 13, 2016)

It's from 1936, printed in a Palestinian newspaper while you people say the Palestinians did not exist. LOL


----------



## Hollie (Dec 13, 2016)

montelatici said:


> It's from 1936, printed in a Palestinian newspaper while you people say the Palestinians did not exist. LOL


You have convinced yourself that a mythical "country of Pal'istan" once existed. That's fine sweetie. Just don't expect others to share your delusions. LOL. 

There is something called the "Bible Belt Newspaper" 
This Bible Belt paper just discovered some interesting folks -- they're called 'evangelicals'


It must be published in the "country of the Bible Belt". LOL


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 13, 2016)

montelatici,  et al,

You do not listen very well.  One more time.



montelatici said:


> It's from 1936, printed in a Palestinian newspaper while you people say the Palestinians did not exist. LOL


*(COMMENT)*

In the 1936, the place called "Palestine" referred to the territory to which the Mandate for Palestine applied.   You will find this in Paragraph 1 Part I, Palestine Order In Council.

You have to remember, Palestine was within such boundaries as may be fixed by the Allied Powers; NOT by the Arabs of the territory.  You will find this in the San Remo Convention and the Mandate for Palestine.

Don't confuse the "Palestine" that you try to imply as some sort of self-governing institution or special entity, country or state, under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinians.  It certainly is not.  It is a territorial name. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Dec 13, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici,  et al,
> 
> You do not listen very well.  One more time.
> 
> ...



You don't understand very well.  And, I don't listen to morons.  The Palestinians considered themselves Palestinians even though the British refused to allow them exercise self-government, because they (the British)  were intent on flooding the land with enough European Jews to be able to subjugate and expropriate the native Palestinian Muslims and Christians. 

Just as Kurds consider themselves Kurds, who have never had a state under the sovereignty of Kurds.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 13, 2016)

montelatici said:


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



Monty's "country of Disney'istan". It's getting repetitious. Your really odd notions of history and your need to invent entire nations and nationalities which never existed is a hoot.

Can I suggest a subscription to the Bible Belt News? You might be interested to keep abreast of the National and international events affecting the "country of the Bible Belt".


----------



## montelatici (Dec 13, 2016)

Why do you address me, instead of the facts?  I don't understand what you think you gain by ignoring the facts and addressing the poster the presents the facts to you.  I don't mind, it seems you are attracted to me as you respond to every fact I present.  Don't you have a significant other you can flirt with.  I just don't like you, so quit flirting.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 13, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Just as Kurds consider themselves Kurds, who have never had a state under the sovereignty of Kurds.



I would agree that this is an accurate analogy.  The Kurds are Kurds, but have never had sovereignty of territory.  The Arab Palestinians are Palestinians but have never had sovereignty of territory.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 13, 2016)

But European Zionists never had sovereignty either, until Partition.  At least in pre-history the native Muslim and Christian Palestinians could claim that their ancestors had sovereignty of Canaan, Judea, Samara, Philistia etc.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 13, 2016)

montelatici said:


> But European Zionists never had sovereignty either, until Partition.  At least in pre-history the native Muslim and Christian Palestinians could claim that their ancestors had sovereignty of Canaan, Judea, Samara, Philistia etc.



Oh wow.  Really?  The Jewish people, in antiquity, most certainly DID have sovereignty.  And they have sovereignty now.  

But the fact that a peoples hasn't yet had sovereignty doesn't mean they can't.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 14, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> WRONG it was owned by absentee Ottoman landlords


And the Ottomans lost the war.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 14, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici,  et al,
> 
> You do not listen very well.  One more time.
> 
> ...


Still shoveling Israeli shit, I see.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 14, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > But European Zionists never had sovereignty either, until Partition.  At least in pre-history the native Muslim and Christian Palestinians could claim that their ancestors had sovereignty of Canaan, Judea, Samara, Philistia etc.
> ...



There was indeed, for a short period, a Jewish "regime" in the Palestine/Judea of antiquity although many, if not the majority of the lower class Palestinians/Judeans remained pagans. Unfortunately the overwhelming majority of practioners of Temple Judaism perished when the Romans got fed up with their continuing rebellions.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 14, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici,  et al,
> 
> You do not listen very well.  One more time.
> 
> ...



In 1936 the area may have been called Palestine because it has always been known as Palestine, ever since Heroditus wrote about it and probably before. It was known as Palestine right up until 1948 when the Zionists seceded to form their own "state".  From 1920 until 1948 Palestine was considered an "sucessor state in waiting" alongside Syria, Lebanon, etc. The spanner in the works preventing Palestine joining Syria, Lebanon, etc. as an independant state, was the unforseen consequences of including Balfour's little note in the mandate text and allowing Zionist immigration in the first place.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 14, 2016)

Challenger said:


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



It's actually comically tragic how you IJH'ers continually attempt to re-write history.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

montelatici said:


> It's from 1936, printed in a Palestinian newspaper while you people say the Palestinians did not exist. LOL









 Because they used a title does not mean they existed under that title, they called themselves south Syrians generally. And in this paper they call themselves filastins because that is what they called the area. It was never a nation or country


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Why do you address me, instead of the facts?  I don't understand what you think you gain by ignoring the facts and addressing the poster the presents the facts to you.  I don't mind, it seems you are attracted to me as you respond to every fact I present.  Don't you have a significant other you can flirt with.  I just don't like you, so quit flirting.










 Because you dont post facts, you manipulate words until they meet with your POV


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

montelatici said:


> But European Zionists never had sovereignty either, until Partition.  At least in pre-history the native Muslim and Christian Palestinians could claim that their ancestors had sovereignty of Canaan, Judea, Samara, Philistia etc.









WRONG as International law of 1922 gave then sovereignty of the land. A fact you ignore because it destroys your whole POV


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

Challenger said:


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









 And where does it say that in any mandate documents, LoN treaties or minute's of the LoN meettings


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > WRONG it was owned by absentee Ottoman landlords
> ...









 Correct and the sovereingty of the former empire was transferred to the LoN, not the land title


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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










 Your stock answer now when you are shown to be wrong or are telling lies


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...









 And there has never been an arab muslim regime at any time. And the stock answer of the neo nazi and neo marxist when faced with the truth, LIE


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 14, 2016)

montelatici,  et al,

The overall politics that set the ground conditions for the Kurds, is not even remotely similar to that of the Arab Palestinians.  The Kurdistan was specifically discussed in Section III, Articles 62 thru 64, Treaty of Sevres.  However, that did not convert into the Treaty of Lausanne.  

Poor analogy.



montelatici said:


> You don't understand very well.  And, I don't listen to morons.  The Palestinians considered themselves Palestinians even though the British refused to allow them exercise self-government, because they (the British)  were intent on flooding the land with enough European Jews to be able to subjugate and expropriate the native Palestinian Muslims and Christians.
> 
> Just as Kurds consider themselves Kurds, who have never had a state under the sovereignty of Kurds.


*(COMMENT)*

Well, in 1936, the term "Palestinian" described Muslims, Jews and all others living in the region.  

For the purposes of this Order _*[Palestine Legislative Council Election Order, 1922]*_ and pending the introduction of an Order in Council regulating Palestinian citizenship, the following persons shall be deemed to be Palestinian citizens:--






 (a)Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the date of commencement of this Order.






 (b)All persons of other than Turkish nationality habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the said date, who shall within two calendar months of the said date make application for Palestinian citizenship in such form and before such officer as may be prescribed by the High Commissioner.​
SECTION III.
*QUESTIONNAIRE OF PERMANENT MANDATES COMMISSION,*
*WITH BRIEF REPLIES.*
I.--JEWISH NATIONAL HOME.​
3._Q. What measures have been taken to bring the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?_

_A._ The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.

The Convention between His Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States which provides for the treatment of American citizens in Palestine and places them on the same footing as other foreign subjects, came into force in December, 1925. The Convention recites the Mandate and declares that the United States consents to the administration of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty pursuant to the Mandate. It expressly confers on the nationals of the United States the right to establish and maintain educational and religious institutions subject to the provision of any local laws for the maintenance of public order and public morals.

A Commission under the Chairmanship of Sir Anton Bertram, ex-Chief Justice of Ceylon, was appointed by the High Commissioner to enquire into controversies between the Orthodox Patriarchate and the Arab Orthodox Community as to the rights of the laity; controversies not affecting the custody of the Holy Places nor falling within the competence of the proposed Holy Places Commission. The Report of the Commission has not yet been published.​"The 1925 Palestine Citizenship Order-in-Council, passed by the British government and implemented in the Palestine Mandate, *was the first piece of mandate legislation to officially recognize Palestine's Arab community as citizens of Palestine rather than 'ex-enemy Ottoman subjects.*  This marked a change in the legal position of Palestine's Arab residents, and a confirmation of the de facto status of Palestine's Jewish residents. But as our guest Lauren Banko explains in this episode, the reality on the ground for the Arab inhabitants of Palestine and emigrants settled outside of the former Ottoman realms did not reflect the British mandatory understanding of citizenship."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 14, 2016)

Nothing will please the Pali majority except the elimination of Israel & death to all Israeli citizens including Christians & Muslims as well as the Jews.  Far better chance of hell freezing over.

Danon: History tells us the Palestinians don't want a state


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 14, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> 3._Q. What measures have been taken to bring *the country* under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will *safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine,* irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?_



Thank you.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 14, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> "The 1925 Palestine Citizenship Order-in-Council, passed by the British government and implemented in the Palestine Mandate,* was the first piece of mandate legislation to officially recognize Palestine's Arab community as citizens of Palestine rather than 'ex-enemy Ottoman subjects. *This marked a change in the legal position of Palestine's Arab residents, and a confirmation of the *de facto* status of Palestine's Jewish residents.


Thank you.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > 3._Q. What measures have been taken to bring *the country* under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will *safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine,* irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?_
> ...









 So why have you done a monte and manipulated the text ?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 14, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > "The 1925 Palestine Citizenship Order-in-Council, passed by the British government and implemented in the Palestine Mandate,* was the first piece of mandate legislation to officially recognize Palestine's Arab community as citizens of Palestine rather than 'ex-enemy Ottoman subjects. *This marked a change in the legal position of Palestine's Arab residents, and a confirmation of the *de facto* status of Palestine's Jewish residents.
> ...









 Do you understand what is being said here ?


----------



## Challenger (Dec 15, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> Nothing will please the Pali majority except the elimination of Israel & death to all Israeli citizens including Christians & Muslims as well as the Jews.  Far better chance of hell freezing over.
> 
> Danon: History tells us the Palestinians don't want a state


That's basically Goebbels saying Germany didn't want a war but the "Jews" left them with no choice.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 15, 2016)

Challenger said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing will please the Pali majority except the elimination of Israel & death to all Israeli citizens including Christians & Muslims as well as the Jews.  Far better chance of hell freezing over.
> ...






 And that is where the arab muslims got it from


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 15, 2016)

Challenger,  et al

This is probably one of the worst misleading analogies I've every seen.



Challenger said:


> That's basically Goebbels saying Germany didn't want a war but the "Jews" left them with no choice.


*(COMMENT)*

Not only is the application dubious, the Jews did not pick-up arms against the Germans.  However, it is the Arab Palestinians (including more than a half-dozen terrorist organizations) that took-up arms against the Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3 (Dec 15, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


The rest of us refer to them as *Displaced Jordanians Awaiting Repatriation to the East SIde of the Jordan River.*


----------



## Challenger (Dec 15, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al
> 
> This is probably one of the worst misleading analogies I've every seen.
> 
> ...



Zionists are always quick to blame their victims, just like the Nazis before them. I was just illustrating the point.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 15, 2016)

Challenger said:


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



There are multiple franchises of _Islamic Terrorism Intl. Inc_., operating out of Gaza and the West Bank engaged in attacks aimed at israel. They are not victims. They are the aggressors.

So, what point were you attempting to illustrate - the point you don't understand?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 15, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al
> 
> This is probably one of the worst misleading analogies I've every seen.
> 
> ...



The invading Jewish terrorist organizations took up arms against the native inhabitants of Palestine long before Israel existed.  The Muslims and Christians merely defended themselves from the hostile invading Jews (HIJs).


----------



## montelatici (Dec 15, 2016)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



You mean victims like _Jew terror Intl. Ltd. _(Stern Gang, Irgun, Hagganah, etc.)


----------



## Hollie (Dec 15, 2016)

montelatici said:


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


No, I mean islamic terrorist organizations designated as such by many governments, such as those which have nearly completed the purge of xtians from the islamist Middle East.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 15, 2016)

You do know, of course that the Axis Governments called the various European resistance movements "terrorists", "bandits", "criminal thugs", "murderers" and even "extremists". It's all a matter of perception.


----------



## Hollie (Dec 15, 2016)

Challenger said:


> You do know, of course that the Axis Governments called the various European resistance movements "terrorists", "bandits", "criminal thugs", "murderers" and even "extremists". It's all a matter of perception.


Of course. You can flail your Pom Poms for the "Freedom Fighters" who committed the London bus and subway bombings. 

After all, the Brits deserved it, right?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 15, 2016)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > You do know, of course that the Axis Governments called the various European resistance movements "terrorists", "bandits", "criminal thugs", "murderers" and even "extremists". It's all a matter of perception.
> ...



The Irish thought so. Oh, you weren't referring to the IRA?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 15, 2016)

montelatici said:


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


No. If you had read my post, you would not have read anything mention of the IRA. However, don't let that stop you from flailing your Pom Poms for your heroes who committed the attacks on the Brits.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 15, 2016)

Challenger said:


> You do know, of course that the Axis Governments called the various European resistance movements "terrorists", "bandits", "criminal thugs", "murderers" and even "extremists". It's all a matter of perception.



Yes of course.  And Rachel Corrie was a "peace activist."


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 15, 2016)

Challenger,  et al,

Yeah, --- if you say so.



Challenger said:


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


*(COMMENT)*

You can pretend all you want that the Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters operating within the region are just "social clubs"  that have no history of:

The list of terrorist acts includes:

Premeditated attacks on innocent civilian targets;
Kidnapping or hostage-taking;
Causing extensive destruction to a public or private facility, including information systems;
Seizure of aircrafts and ships;
Manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport or use of weapons, explosives;
Activités causing fires, explosions or floods;
Directing or participating in the activities of a terrorist group, including by funding its activities or supplying material resources.
etc, etc, etc ...
The implication that organizations like: Hamas-Izz al-Din al-Qassem (terrorist wing of Hamas) and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad are not involved with Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence is imbedded in history.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 15, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> Yeah, --- if you say so.
> 
> ...


Oh jeese, another slime the Palestinians post from Rocco.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 15, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> Yeah, --- if you say so.
> 
> ...



Well if the clown continues this crap, I'll provide more in response.  This is just the beginning.


Murdered by Jew terrorists:






*Forgotten British Victims of Jewish Terrorism*


----------



## Challenger (Dec 15, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> The list of terrorist acts includes:
> 
> Premeditated attacks on innocent civilian targets;
> Kidnapping or hostage-taking;
> ...



Oh, you mean activities carried out by Lehi, Irgun, Palmach, and Hagana? All of whom turned into the IDF, directed, of course by the Jewish Agency which became.......the government of Zionist Israel!!!

Zionist Israel, the original terrorist state.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 15, 2016)

montelatici said:


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






Explain again how they were invaders after being invited by the lands legal owners ?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 15, 2016)

montelatici said:


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








 The original IDF set up to protect unarmed Jews from attacks by arab muslims


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 15, 2016)

montelatici,  et al,

Rather interesting that we're talking about post-Israeli Independence (after 1948) and you respond with pre-A/RES/181(II).

The picture is actually quite famous.  The first time I saw it, was in a British Counterterrorism Course as SHAPE Belgium.  

There is no denying it and no excuse for what the Irgun Zvai Leumi did to Sergeants Clifford Martin and Mervyn Paice in July 1947.  As is said today:  "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever.  No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts."  (_UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon_)

"Following the hanging of Martin and Paice, a series of anti-Jewish riots broke out across Britain, further alarming Jews who still clung to empty professions of British patriotism."  dailystormer.com

*Hanged Drawn and Quartered Execution*
Following the hanging of Martin and Paice, a series of anti-Jewish riots broke out across Britain, further alarming Jews who still clung to empty professions of British patriotism.dailystormer.com​


montelatici said:


> Well if the clown continues this crap, I'll provide more in response.  This is just the beginning.
> 
> Murdered by Jew terrorists:
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Believe me when I say, that no one is going to let the Israelis forget the actions of the Irgun during the latter part of the Arab-Jewish Civil War; least of all the pro-Palestinians grappling for all the mud they can sling. 

Certainly, we would not want to bring-up the three Bombings in and near a bus station (71 Casualties), Arab Palestinians that made the Grenade attack by Arab at Jews praying at the Tomb of the Patriarchs (41 Casualties), 12 killed, 19 injured (mostly children) in attack on school bus _(when children are the target, the Palestinian wanted to make sure they killed as children as the could - so they used 3 bazooka rockets)_, the attack with guns and grenades at Ben Gurion Airport (28 killed and 78 wounded); the Armed Assault of the Olympic Village in Munich kidnapping and killing, and the PLO attack on Israeli Maalot collective farm (27 killed and 134 more casualties).  And that is just a very small sample of the moral actions taken by the Arab Palestinians before they even declared Independence.

YES --- I doubt very seriously that any honest Israeli is going to deny that they have made mistakes _(some serious mistakes)_.  Everybody has.  BUT if it is the case that the Israeli have blood to wash-off their hands, --- the Arab Palestinians need to take a shower to wash their blood soaked body (head to toe). 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 15, 2016)

montelatici said:


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






http://www.catholicarrogance.org/+Artwork/Catholic_liberalism/Hitler&Nuncio.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/34/20/a8/3420a8b12cd7a2b684d0de3dae2f11d5.jpg


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 15, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


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









 How is telling the truth another slime the palestinians post ?


----------



## montelatici (Dec 15, 2016)

No MJB, I will just expose Jew terrorism every time he pulls his slime shit.


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 15, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


It is humorous, MJB.  Here Rocco is always the gentleman and you can tell he knows his subject, and then we have Monte throwing names at all who disagree with his point of view.  I think the viewers are able to discern who to believe unless their mind set is like Monte's.

I came across an old article the other day  It was written by a Palestinian.

Lessons We Palestinians Can Learn


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici said:


> No MJB, I will just expose Jew terrorism every time he pulls his slime shit.









 Just as I will expose Catholic terrorism and their part in the holocaust


----------



## Challenger (Dec 16, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Oh good grief, why don't you two just get a room.

Wonder who this "Bassam Tawil" is? For a "scholar", there's a distinct lack of information publicly available. He/she/it is probably an IDF nerd spending their national service in front of a computer screen spouting pro-Zionist Israel garbage, Palestinian? yeah, right, whatever.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 16, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> BUT if it is the case that the Israeli have blood to wash-off their hands, --- the Arab Palestinians need to take a shower to wash their blood soaked body (head to toe).



Boy have you got that the wrong way round, just look at the B'Tselem statistics wouls be enough to prove the above statement is a gross and myopic distortion of the facts; here's an example: 50 Days: More than 500 Children - Facts and figures on fatalities in Gaza, Summer 2014 



RoccoR said:


> "Following the hanging of Martin and Paice, a series of anti-Jewish riots broke out across Britain, further alarming Jews who still clung to empty professions of British patriotism." dailystormer.com
> 
> *Hanged Drawn and Quartered Execution*
> Following the hanging of Martin and Paice, a series of anti-Jewish riots broke out across Britain, further alarming Jews who still clung to empty professions of British patriotism.dailystormer.com



And finally the mask slips...RoccoR quoting the notorious anti-Semitic, white supremacist, neo-nazi.alt-Right "Daily Stormer". You should be ashamed of yourself.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 16, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...









 You didnt look very hard did you as I find this


https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=B...firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=pd9TWMa1BerW8gfmpIbgBg


Over 79,400 entries for you to wade through


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 16, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > BUT if it is the case that the Israeli have blood to wash-off their hands, --- the Arab Palestinians need to take a shower to wash their blood soaked body (head to toe).
> ...










 It must be true as it is reported by the left wing  B'tselem


So using the site as an example is wrong now, is this because it destroys your POV


----------



## Hollie (Dec 16, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > BUT if it is the case that the Israeli have blood to wash-off their hands, --- the Arab Palestinians need to take a shower to wash their blood soaked body (head to toe).
> ...


I've learned to never be surprised when Islamic terrorist apologists use _the children_ as elements for nothing more than cheap propaganda. You can thank your heroes in Hamas for throwing _the children_ on the altar of martyrdom. let's be honest and acknowledge that the death of_ the children_ serve as little more than a convenient cut and paste article you use to promote your Jew hatreds.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 16, 2016)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



Rocco, the fascist, using antisemitic memes to further confirm his fascist thuggery forgets that it is the Israelis, even at a ministerial level that promote the killing of Palestinian children as a demographic tool.  His deep hatred of Arabs has no limits.  Quit spouting propaganda clown.

"They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there...."

Israel’s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be ‘the enemy’


----------



## Challenger (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici said:


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



That's why there will never be peace, the Zionists indoctrinate their children to hate "Arabs" so when they grow up they will be good stormtroopers for the cause, but as usual they blame the Palestinians for "intransigence" while they steal more Palestinian land. It's ironic that as far back as the late 1930's Jewish commentators noted this indoctrination and compared it with what the Nazis were doing in Germany to German children at the time. Of course when the Palestinians copy the lessons they learned from the Zionists, *they* get all the bad press.


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 16, 2016)

Challenger,  et al,

You are Killing me!   Just Killing me! ...



Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > BUT if it is the case that the Israeli have blood to wash-off their hands, --- the Arab Palestinians need to take a shower to wash their blood soaked body (head to toe).
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I think you will find that a vast majority of the civilian casualties were a direct result of the depraved indifference (murder) demonstrated by HAMAS violations of:

23.  Location of Military Objectives outside Densely Populated Areas
It is also related to the prohibition of human shields (see Rule 97), as everything feasible must be done to separate military objectives from the civilian population, but in no event may civilians be used to shield military objectives.
ICRC service​
24.  Removal of Civilians and Civilian Objects from the Vicinity of Military Objectives
The duty of each party to the conflict, to the extent feasible, to remove civilian persons and objects under its control from the vicinity of military objectives is set forth in Article 58(a) of Additional Protocol I, to which no reservations relevant to this rule have been made.
ICRC service​


Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > "Following the hanging of Martin and Paice, a series of anti-Jewish riots broke out across Britain, further alarming Jews who still clung to empty professions of British patriotism." dailystormer.com
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Actually, _*I quoted the "Bing - Image" attribution of the picture*_.   I did this to show that your image and use of the photo was exactly the same as that used by the Daily Stormer anti-Jewish campaign in contemporary times.   To see the similarity in the way you use the picture and the anti-Semtics use the picture, go to: 

*Commemorating British Casualties of Jewish Terrorism, 1944–1948*
Francis Carr Begbie - *Occidental Observer *August 8, 2015​And it should be noted that you --- the Daily Stormer --- and Andrew Anglin _(founder of the neo-Nazi Daily Stormer)_ are of a very similar mind.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici said:


> I just post fact.  You just can't take the truth.



So many of your facts have been refuted on numerous occasions.  You are like a one-man propaganda machine for the Palestinians.  Listen up, people, if you happen to be a newcomer.  You will see Monte spewing out her "facts" over and over again because he is on a mission to attempt to convince the readers that the Israeli State should not exist.  It is as simple as that.  So, newcomers, expect Monte to continually repeat himself from morning to night like a broken record.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 16, 2016)

Challenger said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...









 And all the evidence points to this being the palestinians indoctrinating their children. You dont have copies of Israeli school programmes on TV showing them doing this, but there are hundreds of such videos showing the arab muslims poisoning childrens minds


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 16, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


----------



## montelatici (Dec 16, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> You are Killing me!   Just Killing me! ...
> 
> ...




The British Army's Palestine Veteran's  and British Forces in Palestine sites contain the information too.  The veterans can tell you about the viciousness and depravity of the Jewish terrorists.

"....Zionist attacks were the most common though and it was impossible to counter them efficiently because of influential Zionist support in the US and UK and indecisive British politicians. In addition the French were actively supporting Zionist groups even during the war itself...."

British Forces in Palestine


Palestine Veterans Association


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 16, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...








 One left wing activists POV and no evidence to support the claim. You make life very hard for yourself dont you, as just because you believe this is factual does not mean it is. Your track record shows that you will only believe anything that is bad about the Jews or Israel, while seeing the arab muslims as angels and blameless


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici said:


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










 And as your link says


Palestine was in turmoil as Jews across the world attempted to reach their 'promised land'. *Unfortunately Britain had gone back on its promise, and was doing all it could to keep the incomers out.*



Now this proves that the Jews were not invaders and that they were being treated unfairly by Britain, something you constantly deny even though your links say this is the case


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici,  et al,

There is truth here, but unfocused by time and by association.  



montelatici said:


> The British Army's Palestine Veteran's  and British Forces in Palestine sites contain the information too.  The veterans can tell you about the viciousness and depravity of the Jewish terrorists.
> 
> "....Zionist attacks were the most common though and it was impossible to counter them efficiently because of influential Zionist support in the US and UK and indecisive British politicians. In addition the French were actively supporting Zionist groups even during the war itself...."
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

As far as what the veterans think, I'm quite sure that there are varied opinions; of a nature that those without the experience, will never understand.  

And just as I've explained recently, there is no such thing as a clean fight.  There is no use in a conflict if there is no intention to win.  And there will be the loss in both treasury and blood.  We _(all sides)_ must understand that the longer the conflict rages, the less likely the potential for peace and security for one side or the other.  I invite you to review the commentary in Posting #440 wherein a response to the why of the conflict ad the depravity of the opponent is supplemented with exemplars.  In Posting #440, we make a plain distinction be the Civil War Period (prior to 1948) and the Post-War Period (after 1948).  In the case of the Israelis, there was an evolution towards a more positive perception of the Arab-Palestinian.  The progress of the positive perception was then eroded.  The perception and understanding of the Israel, as seen prior to 1948 _(decades more than a half century ago)_, is much different from the contemporary Israeli.  And just as implied in the commentary of Posting #465, as the Israelis implement Article #43 of the Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 18 October 1907 _(public order and safety)_, the Arab Palestinian have taken steps in the reverse direction.

In the shadow of the the Arab-Palestinian search for greater and greater justification for the continuation of the conflict _(by all means)_, there is something happening in Israel that has to do with saving succeeding generations from the scourge of Arab-Israeli Conflict; which has brought untold sorrow and pain to the Region --- and around the globe.  That something, with no corresponding counterpart in the Arab-Palestinian Community, is the re-evaluation of the direction and how Israel can bring about an end to the conflict without harming Israel itself.  This is a discussion that the Arab-Palestinian has yet attained an ability to achieved.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Dec 16, 2016)

1. A civil war is a war between citizens/inhabitants of a particular place.  The Jews were people from Europe attempting (and succeeded) to conquer a native people in a land in the Middle East.

2. Depravity was exhibited by the European invader when they attacked, murdered, raped and evicted the native Muslims and Christians living in Palestine, long before the UN decided to illegally partition the country giving 55% of the land to 30% of of the population and contemplated leaving, in the Jewish partition, 400,000 Muslims and Christians forever to be ruled by Jews, numbering about the same at the time,  in dhimmi style fashion never to achieve self-determination.

3. The Palestinians can resist subjugation or passively accept Jewish rule and oppression as second-class citizens in parts of the land deemed Israel or third-class citizens deemed occupied territories.  What would you do Rocco, bend over and take it or resist?


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici said:


> 1. A civil war is a war between citizens/inhabitants of a particular place.  The Jews were people from Europe attempting (and succeeded) to conquer a native people in a land in the Middle East.
> 
> 2. Depravity was exhibited by the European invader when they attacked, murdered, raped and evicted the native Muslims and Christians living in Palestine, long before the UN decided to illegally partition the country giving 55% of the land to 30% of of the population and contemplated leaving, in the Jewish partition, 400,000 Muslims and Christians forever to be ruled by Jews, numbering about the same at the time,  in dhimmi style fashion never to achieve self-determination.
> 
> 3. The Palestinians can resist subjugation or passively accept Jewish rule and oppression as second-class citizens in parts of the land deemed Israel or third-class citizens deemed occupied territories.  What would you do Rocco, bend over and take it or resist?



RoccoR do you find it as amusing as I do how this Robot keeps on saying the same thing about these so-called "Native?"  I wonder how they would have gotten on if the majority of them stayed in their own impoverished countries that surround Israel instead of coming to the area for the jobs the Israelis had for them, just like we see immigrants today doing.  No doubt the British officials in the area saw what was happening and were able to discern which country they came from according to their accent, the same way we here can tell a Southern accent from a New York one.  Imagine the UN saying that anyone in the area for only two years can be considered a refugee.  Isn't that a hoot?  Two years in an area certainly doesn't make one indigenous to the area.

Reports from the British officials in the area sent back to Churchill is no doubt the reason Churchill said:

"So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population."


----------



## montelatici (Dec 16, 2016)

MJ's propaganda, now the facts:


----------



## Hollie (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici said:


> 1. A civil war is a war between citizens/inhabitants of a particular place.  The Jews were people from Europe attempting (and succeeded) to conquer a native people in a land in the Middle East.
> 
> 2. Depravity was exhibited by the European invader when they attacked, murdered, raped and evicted the native Muslims and Christians living in Palestine, long before the UN decided to illegally partition the country giving 55% of the land to 30% of of the population and contemplated leaving, in the Jewish partition, 400,000 Muslims and Christians forever to be ruled by Jews, numbering about the same at the time,  in dhimmi style fashion never to achieve self-determination.
> 
> 3. The Palestinians can resist subjugation or passively accept Jewish rule and oppression as second-class citizens in parts of the land deemed Israel or third-class citizens deemed occupied territories.  What would you do Rocco, bend over and take it or resist?



It's remarkable how these keyboard gee-had types are always so anxious to urge others to die for their personal enjoyment.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici said:


> ... forever to be ruled by Jews ... in dhimmi style fashion never to achieve self-determination ...



Do you not see the absolute irony of your own words?


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici,  et al,

Oh this is so ridiculous.



montelatici said:


> 1. A civil war is a war between citizens/inhabitants of a particular place.  The Jews were people from Europe attempting (and succeeded) to conquer a native people in a land in the Middle East.


*(COMMENT)*

As you say, "citizens/inhabitants of a particular place."  That would be between the people granted Citizenship under the 1925 Citizenship Orders and those previously covered by the Naturalization instructions under the Palestine Order in Council (1922).



montelatici said:


> 2. Depravity was exhibited by the European invader when they attacked, murdered, raped and evicted the native Muslims and Christians living in Palestine, long before the UN decided to illegally partition the country giving 55% of the land to 30% of of the population and contemplated leaving, in the Jewish partition, 400,000 Muslims and Christians forever to be ruled by Jews, numbering about the same at the time,  in dhimmi style fashion never to achieve self-determination.


*(COMMENT)*

How is it that the "UN decided to illegally partition the country?"  The UN did not actually Partition the territory.  It established some recommendations for the inhabitance to establish independence.  The Arabs inhabitance rejected the entire recommendation.  However, the Jewish population accepted the recommendation and began in January 1948 to follow the Steps Preparatory to Independence.  

The Jewish Provisional Government of Israel Declared Independence along the same lines as recommended by the UN Resolution 181(II).  Aggressor attempts to prevent the Jewish Inhabitance in exercising self-determination altered the initial territorial outline and was expanded as a result of combat losses by invading Arab League Nations.



montelatici said:


> 3. The Palestinians can resist subjugation or passively accept Jewish rule and oppression as second-class citizens in parts of the land deemed Israel or third-class citizens deemed occupied territories.  What would you do Rocco, bend over and take it or resist?


*(COMMENT)*

The first confrontation was in April 1920, in Jerusalem which was under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA).  The Arab Community was incited to violence by the Hajj Amin al-Husayni, who was delivering inflammatory speeches to crowds of Arabs.

 Actually, it was the Arab Community that demanded that the Arabs have a superior status to the Jewish Community, and would not accept equal billing with the Jewish Community.  Not being given a position of superiority, they elected to pursue violence as a policy of confrontation.

From this first confrontation, right through the Civil War, there was no such thing as Jewish Rule.  The Jewish component of the citizenry did not implement rule until 15 May 1948.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 16, 2016)

Hossfly,  et al,

This is a great observation.



Hossfly said:


> RoccoR do you find it as amusing as I do how this Robot keeps on saying the same thing about these so-called "Native?"


*(COMMENT)*

This concept and terminology is actually amplified by A/RES/15/1514 (XV) (Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples) which is not even applicable to the situation.  The Mandate System, a product of all the members to the League of Nations, was not the same as colonial expansion; the British did not expand the Empire as the Mandatory.

Just discount anything that remotely sound binding on the basis of being "native."  The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), or the Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries (GICC), do not even address "native" status.  Even the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP) does not address "native" status.
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf

*Worth Noting:* 

•  Neither the GICC or the DRIP are binding Conventions with the force of law. 
•  And none of these documents even contain the word "native."
•  While it is generally understood that "indigenous peoples" ("A") *are equal to all other peoples* ("B"), in no case do "indigenous people" ("A") have right that exceed those of other peoples ("B").  ...
*IF* "A" = "B"  *THEN* it is also true that "B" = "A"... It is philosophically a "Commutative Property" in Logic.​
Most Respectfully,
R

​


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 16, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> people granted Citizenship under the 1925 Citizenship Orders


Is that the one imposed on Palestine at the point of a gun by foreigners?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 16, 2016)

montelatici said:


> 1. A civil war is a war between citizens/inhabitants of a particular place. The Jews were people from Europe attempting (and succeeded) to conquer a native people in a land in the Middle East.


Excellent observation.

This is the first time I have seen a battle between a colonial power and the natives called a civil war.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 16, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> How is it that the "UN decided to illegally partition the country?" The UN did not actually Partition the territory.


Bravo, Rocco, that is a point I have been trying to make for years.


The next question has to be: how did Israel acquire Palestinian territory?


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 16, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > How is it that the "UN decided to illegally partition the country?" The UN did not actually Partition the territory.
> ...


Answer: They won it in a card game from a Navajo Indian.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 16, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> This is the first time I have seen a battle between a colonial power and the natives called a civil war.



Probably because this is the first time that an indigenous population is considered, by some, to be a "colonial power".


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

montelatici said:


> 1. A civil war is a war between citizens/inhabitants of a particular place.  The Jews were people from Europe attempting (and succeeded) to conquer a native people in a land in the Middle East.
> 
> 2. Depravity was exhibited by the European invader when they attacked, murdered, raped and evicted the native Muslims and Christians living in Palestine, long before the UN decided to illegally partition the country giving 55% of the land to 30% of of the population and contemplated leaving, in the Jewish partition, 400,000 Muslims and Christians forever to be ruled by Jews, numbering about the same at the time,  in dhimmi style fashion never to achieve self-determination.
> 
> 3. The Palestinians can resist subjugation or passively accept Jewish rule and oppression as second-class citizens in parts of the land deemed Israel or third-class citizens deemed occupied territories.  What would you do Rocco, bend over and take it or resist?








 Under international law they were citizens of palestine, or are you denying the Jews their rights

Payback is a bitch, and a few Jews did this as an example of what the arab's had been doing to them for 1400 years. Again you deny the Jews their rights under international law.

Obey international law that I forced on the population in the first place. Look it up as tinny posted it only last week, he posted that the arab muslims forced the LoN to add to the mandate that no Jew would be allowed to live in trans Jordan and no arabwould be allowed to live in the Jewish national home


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJ's propaganda, now the facts:
> 
> 
> View attachment 102403








 How can they be facts when they are provided by anti semitic stooges

 And do your math and see that this page does not match with the other links you give in regards to actual numbers

 Shot yourself in the foot again freddy


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > people granted Citizenship under the 1925 Citizenship Orders
> ...








 NO as they could ignore it and become stateless with no fall back on the countries welfare. So no gun at anyones head unless you have a link from a reliable unbiased source to prove your claim.

By the way if the gun was held to the arab head it was also held to the Jew head, so why no mention of the Jews in your rant ?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > 1. A civil war is a war between citizens/inhabitants of a particular place. The Jews were people from Europe attempting (and succeeded) to conquer a native people in a land in the Middle East.
> ...







 Denying the existence of JEWS in palestine again prior to the invention of Zionism.  It wont work as you will be called out on it every time


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > How is it that the "UN decided to illegally partition the country?" The UN did not actually Partition the territory.
> ...







 Under International laws and the UN charter as you have been told thousands of times, and had the relevant links provided


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 17, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


I have never denied the existence of the native Jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 17, 2016)

Phoenall said:


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


Not true.

Passage and link?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...








 LIAR as you do it all the time, the problem is you dont know you are doing it as it is part of your brainwashing. All the Jews in Israel are now natives under international laws and you try to deny them these rights. How can an arab muslim that arrives on the morning be classed as a palestinian by lunch time and be able to claim right of return to a non existent home they have never seen. That is how you differ i your views on Jews and arab's


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...









 Mandate of Palestine



*The Council of the League of Nations:*
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;



Try reading the UN charter in regards to claiming an independent state


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, --- you only capture what is supportive of your position; but not the more meaningful point-of-view.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > How is it that the "UN decided to illegally partition the country?" The UN did not actually Partition the territory.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The of mine that you cite came from Posting #466 in response to Query #2; the response came in two parts:


•  The FIRST part was that the UN did not actually partition the former Mandate Territory. 

•  The second part of the response answers your question here:  "[H]ow did Israel acquire Palestinian territory?"

••   "Jewish Provisional Government of Israel Declared Independence"

••   "the Jewish Inhabitance in exercising self-determination"​
In 1948, the phrase "exercising self-determination" is really the application of Chapter I, Article 1(2):

"2.  To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;"

GA/SHC/4085  5 NOVEMBER 2013:  Excerpt of:  *Self-Determination Integral to Basic Human Rights, Fundamental Freedoms, Third Committee Told as It Concludes General Discussion
*
“It is only through the realization of this very basic right of people to determine, with no compulsion or coercion, their own future, political status and independence that we can begin to address others such as dignity, justice, progress and equity,” said the representative of Maldives.  Yet millions of people were stripped of the right to determine their own fate, due either to military intervention, aggression, occupation or to exploitation by foreign Powers.​The Jewish were NOT QUITE allowed to "determine, with no compulsion or coercion, their own future, political status and independence."  There was (in effect) an Arab-Jewish Civil War --- followed by the "use of force against the embryonic Jewish territorial integrity and political independence." ---  These forces, originating from Machiavellian Powerful Arab interests with hidden agendas, both inside and outside Palestine _(a military coalition of the Arab League)_, moving in strength and numbers -- with the expressed purpose to defy by armed military intervention the Charter and the resolution of the General Assembly --- engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the the Jewish act of self-determination.

*(RECAP - How did Israel acquire Palestinian Territory?)*

Through the act of self-determination without objection from the Allied Powers --- having Title and Rights --- that administered the territory.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 17, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> The Jewish were NOT QUITE allowed to "determine, with no compulsion or coercion, their own future, political status and independence." There was (in effect) an Arab-Jewish Civil War


Load of crap, Rocco.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Jewish were NOT QUITE allowed to "determine, with no compulsion or coercion, their own future, political status and independence." There was (in effect) an Arab-Jewish Civil War
> ...









 Only because it destroys what you have been told all these years


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 17, 2016)

Phoenall said:


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


You believe a load of crap?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Jewish were NOT QUITE allowed to "determine, with no compulsion or coercion, their own future, political status and independence." There was (in effect) an Arab-Jewish Civil War
> ...


Another of your usual stunningly inept arguments.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 17, 2016)

Hossfly said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



When all Monte has left is to criticize his opposition, he is the proven loser. What fun.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...









 I cant see how as I dont believe anything you post seeing as it is all islamonazi pallywood propaganda and real crap


----------



## Hossfly (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Go soak your head, Tinhorn.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 17, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> I have never denied the existence of the native Jews.



You consistently compartmentalize the Jewish people into "real" and "synthetic" in the same way that others do.  You consistently reject the Jewishness of certain of these compartmentalized Jews.  As opposed to seeing them as one people.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 17, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > I have never denied the existence of the native Jews.
> ...



Why can't you get it to your thick skull, that a Jew is a person that practices Judaism?   Europeans that for whatever reason adopted Judaism had no right to expel the native people many of whom, if not most, had ancestors that once practiced Judaism.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 17, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Why can't you get it to your thick skull, that a Jew is a person that practices Judaism?   Europeans that for whatever reason adopted Judaism ...



Hey, here's a thought.  Maybe people practice Judaism because, you know, they're JEWISH.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 17, 2016)

No, they could be Italians, Germans, Poles, Spanish or even of Chinese ethnicity and still practice Judaism.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 17, 2016)

monte, what is your ethnic background?  For example, I'm nationally Canadian.  But I'm ethnically Irish and Scots and German.  

You are trying to tell me that I can't be ethnically Irish or Scots or German, because I'm Canadian.  

Its bullshit.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 17, 2016)

Yes, but Jewish is not an ethnicity, it's a religion.  Anyone of any ethnicity can be Jewish.  Just as anyone of any ethnicity can be Christian or Muslim.  Many Balkan Slavs are Muslims, but they are still Slavs.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 17, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > I have never denied the existence of the native Jews.
> ...


No I don't. There are native Jews and there are foreign Jews.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 18, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Just as a muslim is a person that practises terrorism and violence do you mean.

 The best minds all say that Jew is a race separate to all the others by DNA.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 18, 2016)

montelatici said:


> No, they could be Italians, Germans, Poles, Spanish or even of Chinese ethnicity and still practice Judaism.








 And that makes up about 2% of the worlds Jewish population, so what are the other 98%.

And I dont meannationality I mean actual race as in Caucasion, Negro, arab and Jew


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 18, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Yes, but Jewish is not an ethnicity, it's a religion.  Anyone of any ethnicity can be Jewish.  Just as anyone of any ethnicity can be Christian or Muslim.  Many Balkan Slavs are Muslims, but they are still Slavs.








 And you are wrong, just because the hate sites you visit say that Jews are not a race does not mean it is true. 50 years ago your type were saying the Jewish race until they realised they could delegitimise the Jews by claiming they were not a race. Now we have DNA and so can show they are


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 18, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 But they are still Jews and have the same rights as the native arabs and foreign arab's that infest the Jewish national home


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 18, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Yes, but Jewish is not an ethnicity, it's a religion.  Anyone of any ethnicity can be Jewish.  Just as anyone of any ethnicity can be Christian or Muslim.  Many Balkan Slavs are Muslims, but they are still Slavs.









 But there are very few non Jewish Jews .   As for your Balkan muslims many are illegal immigrants that went to fight against the Serbs so they could steal land for islam.     Dar-al-Islam and Dar-al-Harb remember ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 18, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Are you sure?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 18, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...








 Religious Jew which is not out of the ordinary, not a racial Jew like Ed Milliband who is also a non religious Jew


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 18, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Of course this whole discussion only smokescreens the real issues.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Dec 18, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Well, Sammy Davis, Jr. was a convert, but there are plenty of Ethiopian Jews who are black from birth.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 18, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...









 So you have just realised that you are losing the argument every time and try to derail or deflect


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 18, 2016)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...








 And have the same DNA as indigenous Jews who can trace their history back 2000 years to Judea and Samaria


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 18, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



HUH?  What 'NATIVE PEOPLE" have European Jews expelled?  Ya'll come back, ya hear?


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 18, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...




Hello!  Anybody home?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 18, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Of course this whole discussion only smokescreens the real issues.



As its intended to.  As long as the Arab Palestinians keep arguing that Jews and Israel are not legitimate and do not have legitimate rights, they avoid having to negotiate a solution to the conflict.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 18, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Of course this whole discussion only smokescreens the real issues.
> ...



What legitimacy is there, unless you believe that the British had the right to orchestrate the removal of the native people to make room for a group of Europeans.  And, there is no longer a solution.  Either the Jews will be able to control a majority non-Jew population for the long-term, or a democratic secular state will evolve in which people of different religions will have equal rights.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 19, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...









 Whats wrong freddy scared that the truth will come out and show the world just what you Catholics did to indigenous peoples in the America's. Everything you say is what has been done by YOU and your religion over the last 300 years and all you can find problems with is the re-instatement of Israel


----------



## Shusha (Dec 19, 2016)

montelatici said:


> ... a democratic secular state will evolve in which people of different religions will have equal rights.



Newsflash!  A democratic secular State in which people of different religions have equal rights already exists.  Its called Israel.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 19, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> I think you will find that a vast majority of the civilian casualties were a direct result of the depraved indifference (murder) demonstrated by HAMAS violations of:



The only people displaying "depraved indifference" are those who have the technology to precision strike avoiding unnecessary casualties, yet prefer to eschew this technology in favour of indiscriminate artillery barrages and carpet bombing.




















As for "human shields"

Israeli High Court: Israeli Soldiers Used Palestinians as Human Shields 1,200 Times

UN: Palestinian children tortured, used as human shields by Israel

IDF’s ethics guru slams High Court ban on human shields





RoccoR said:


> Actually, _*I quoted the "Bing - Image" attribution of the picture*_. I did this to show that your image and use of the photo was exactly the same as that used by the Daily Stormer anti-Jewish campaign in contemporary times.



Had you stated that in the original post, you might have been believed, but this is just a pathetic attempt to weasel out of the fact you "outed" yourself.



RoccoR said:


> And it should be noted that you --- the Daily Stormer --- and Andrew Anglin _(founder of the neo-Nazi Daily Stormer)_ are of a very similar mind.



..and yet another pathetic attempt to deflect from the fact you "outed" yourself as a genuine neo-nazi, you are fooling nobody.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 19, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > I think you will find that a vast majority of the civilian casualties were a direct result of the depraved indifference (murder) demonstrated by HAMAS violations of:
> ...









 Haven't these pictures been shown to be views from Syria and not from gaza, and that pallywood passed them of as gaza because they had nothing else. Or is it the new game in the worlds newsrooms of Find the Cuddly toy planted by the photographer to add a human touch ?


----------



## Challenger (Dec 19, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > ... a democratic secular state will evolve in which people of different religions will have equal rights.
> ...



Zionist Israel is lightyears away from being a democratic state in which people of different religions have equal rights. Herrenvolk democracies like Zionist Israel have a long way to go in that regard.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 19, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...









And yet you cant prove your claim without having to go outside of Israel for evidence. And when shown that your own country has similar laws in regards to the ones you complain about the Israeli's having you go silent and run away


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 19, 2016)

Challenger,  et al,

I think maybe you should put your head on straight...



Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > I think you will find that a vast majority of the civilian casualties were a direct result of the depraved indifference (murder) demonstrated by HAMAS violations of:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

First, I don't think you known anything about the technology available to the Israeli Defense Force (IDF).

You inserted video was not an example of Counter-battery fire on Hostile Arab Palestinians indiscriminate indirect fire from Rockets, Artillery and/or Mortars; or indirect or aerial bombardment on triangulated Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (C3I) components. 

Second, I do not believe that the Israeli Air Force currently has strategic bombers capable of (as you say) "carper bombing."

Third, I don't think that the Israeli Air Force has the inventory to answer the 4000 rocket launches leading up to the Israeli Military respond in 2014.  For instance, the air-to-ground Hellfire FMS costs is about $115,000 each.  The FMS cost of a Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) is in excess of $25K each.



Challenger said:


> As for "human shields"
> 
> Israeli High Court: Israeli Soldiers Used Palestinians as Human Shields 1,200 Times
> 
> ...



*(COMMENT)*

Yes, there was an adverse finding by an Israeli Investigation that was adjudicated in an Israeli Court.  The Israelis are very much aware of the necessity for typical procedures in the field to be reigned-in to a more international interpretation of the law.

You will not find any similar legal apparatus or self-policing mechanism in the Arab Palestinian system.  No Hostile Arab Palestinian review is anywhere nowhere near as moral as the Israel system.  



Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, _*I quoted the "Bing - Image" attribution of the picture*_. I did this to show that your image and use of the photo was exactly the same as that used by the Daily Stormer anti-Jewish campaign in contemporary times.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Yeah, OK, if I was attempting to hide something from you, I would not have given you the direct link back to the copied photo source.  The Daily Stormer, photocopy just happened to be the first copied photo in the query.  If you go to the query page, you will find that is the only one that replicates what you rendered.
​
But I generally assigned attributes.  I am quite use to _ad hominem_ attacks.  You can throw as many as you want; just get your facts better oriented.  I think anyone that has read my commentary knows that I always _(at least to the best of my ability)_ make attributions to the first level source at a minimum. 



Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > And it should be noted that you --- the Daily Stormer --- and Andrew Anglin _(founder of the neo-Nazi Daily Stormer)_ are of a very similar mind.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Think of me as you will.  Just keep your fact straight.  

Most Respectfully,
R​


----------



## RoccoR (Dec 19, 2016)

Challenger,  et al,

That would be correct.



Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Israel IS NOT a democracy.  But then, neither is the United States.  They are both republics.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Dec 19, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > ... a democratic secular state will evolve in which people of different religions will have equal rights.
> ...



Israel has control over about 4-5 million people that have no rights at all. Nothing democratic about it, unless you believe the way non-whites were considered non-citizens living in South African controlled Bantustans made Apartheid South Africa democratic. 

And within Israel non-Jews do not have equal rights.  Non-Jews cannot buy land that Jews can buy.  Non-Jews in Israel cannot have family members non-citizens, even spouses,  join them in Israel as Jews can. And, non-Jews whose ancestors owned homes in what is now Israel, have no right of return to their homes, whereas a person the claims to be of the Jewish faith can.  Those are just a few examples. Now, the non-Jews under Israeli control outside of Israel, have no rights at all.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 19, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Oh come on! This is just an emotional outburst painfully lacking in facts.

Israel has control of 4-5 million people who have NO rights AT ALL?!   You are talking about four very distinct groups of people here:  

the Arab Israelis who have full and equal rights in all ways, and actually more rights than the Jewish people in our own land

the Arab Palestinians living under the authority of the PA and whose rights are largely determined by the PA

the Arab Palestinians living under the authority of Hamas and whose rights are largely determined by Hamas

the Arab Palestinians living in Area C

Israel's control over the four groups are distinctly different and every single one of these groups has fundamental rights.  You would look much less like a Pom-Pom flailer (borrowing the term from Hollie) if you attempted to make a reasoned, educated and detailed argument based on facts about various rights of various peoples in the territories.  

For example, you said, "non-Jews can not buy land that Jews can buy".  Factually, legally, untrue.  There is no land in Israel that is legally distinguished as being land that only Jews can buy.  And if you can find me any such Israeli law, please present it.  

You said, non-Jews in Israel can not have family member non-citizens join them but Jews can.  Factually untrue.  Its much, much more complicated than that.  And yes, there is very likely to be practical discrimination, but it is not a legal discrimination as far as I understand.  Again, if you can find me the specific Israeli law which discriminates by ethnicity, please let me know.  

The right of return is a complicated political issue and deserves not to be treated as a one-liner.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 19, 2016)

Shusha said:


> For example, you said, "non-Jews can not buy land that Jews can buy". Factually, legally, untrue. There is no land in Israel that is legally distinguished as being land that only Jews can buy. And if you can find me any such Israeli law, please present it.


Palestinian citizens of Israel cannot even claim their own land.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 19, 2016)

Shusha said:


> You said, non-Jews in Israel can not have family member non-citizens join them but Jews can.


Any Jew can marry a Jew from anyplace and live as a couple in Israel. Palestinians who marry a non citizen Palestinian cannot bring the spouse into the country.

Laila El Haddad from Gaza married a Palestinian from a refugee camp in Lebanon. Israel will not allow him to live with his wife in Gaza.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 19, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > You said, non-Jews in Israel can not have family member non-citizens join them but Jews can.
> ...



Wait, what?  The Laila El Haddad who was born in Kuwait, was raised in Saudi Arabia and who went to school in the US and who now lives in the US with her husband?  THAT Laila El Haddad?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 19, 2016)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


That is the story of Palestinians. Everywhere but home.


----------



## Shusha (Dec 19, 2016)

Oh and wait what?  The Laila El Hadda who is married to the Lebanese man who was educated in the US?

What the F&*K does this have to do with being Palestinian?  

You guys are seriously SO awesome at tearing down your own arguments.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 19, 2016)

Shusha said:


> Oh and wait what?  The Laila El Hadda who is married to the Lebanese man who was educated in the US?
> 
> What the F&*K does this have to do with being Palestinian?
> 
> You guys are seriously SO awesome at tearing down your own arguments.


He isn't Lebanese, he is a Palestinian refugee.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 19, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



1.  A military occupation and being subjected to martial law denotes control. Do you actually believe what you write?  Are you that delusional?

2. Israeli Arabs have the same rights as Jews?  As far as family reunification law for non-Jews the law was extended recently:

15/06/2016

"Law affects tens of thousands of Palestinian families, creates a separate track of naturalization for spouses of Palestinian citizens of Israel from OPT and "enemy states."
Israeli lawmakers voted on 13 June 2016 to extend by an additional year the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law, an emergency regulation that prevents Palestinian citizens of Israel who are married to residents of the Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as countries that Israel considers "enemy states," from living with their families."

The law affects tens of thousands of Palestinian families on both sides of the Green Line boundary between Israel and the West Bank, preventing Palestinians from legally moving into Israel to join their spouses.

65 Members of Knesset voted in favor of extending the law and 14 voted against it.

Israel extends ban on Palestinian family reunification - Adalah

3. JNF does not sell/lease land to non-Jews.  This is from the U.S. State Department 20015 Country Report on Israel..

"Legal petitions against the JNF policy of leasing public land only to Jews continued at year’s end. The NGO Israel Land Fund continued its program to purchase Arab land throughout the country and market it to Jewish buyers, including in the diaspora. The organization claimed all the land belonged to Jews and described as a “danger” the purchase of Jewish-owned lands by non-Jews."

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2015


----------



## Hollie (Dec 19, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...





montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



PA Court: Sale of Palestinian Land to Israelis Is Punishable by Death.


read more: PA court: Sale of Palestinian land to Israelis is punishable by death


----------



## montelatici (Dec 19, 2016)

Reciprocity is appropriate.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 20, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...









 And yet the UN says they do have rights and exercise them daily, they are only restricted when it comes to violence and terrorism. They have free determination, a government and the right to worship.  The US has the same laws as does palestine so why are you singling out Israel for special treatment, is it cos you is racist and an anti semitic POS. 
How is it that Israel such a small nation with so few citizens can rule the world as you claim and stop the rest of the world from attacking them and forcing them to give the arab muslims what they demand. Could it be that you are LYING and the Jews are actually within international laws and are doing no wrong, but the arab muslims are the ones that enforce such things on non muslims and you ignore them completely.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 20, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > For example, you said, "non-Jews can not buy land that Jews can buy". Factually, legally, untrue. There is no land in Israel that is legally distinguished as being land that only Jews can buy. And if you can find me any such Israeli law, please present it.
> ...









 How can they claim what they cant prove, all they have are rusty keys and fake title deeds sold by arafat in the 1990's


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 20, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > You said, non-Jews in Israel can not have family member non-citizens join them but Jews can.
> ...








 Similar laws apply in the US, and also in palestine, Jordan, Syria and most other islamic nations. So what is your point in singling out Israel for attention ?


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 20, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...









 A home they have repeatedly refused to prove is theirs other than by repeating the words of mo'mad when he told them they owned the world and the lack of an international treaty giving them the land.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 20, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Oh and wait what?  The Laila El Hadda who is married to the Lebanese man who was educated in the US?
> ...







Not according to the laws applying to refugees that say they take on the nationality of the nation they reside in. Also he would need to be first generation to be a refugee under the same laws.

 I advise you to read them and get a better understanding on where you are going wrong


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 20, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...







Correct but does not take away any rights

Same laws that all the civilised world put in operation to stop terrorists from entering


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 20, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Reciprocity is appropriate.







 So the Jews can start firing at palestinians indiscriminately and kill any that sell land to non Jews ?


----------



## Challenger (Dec 20, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> That would be correct.
> 
> ...



Talking of getting heads straightened, who said it was? Both Shusha and I stated  "democratic secular state" and "a democratic state" no-one mentioned the word *democracy*.


----------



## Challenger (Dec 20, 2016)

RoccoR said:


> First, I don't think you known anything about the technology available to the Israeli Defense Force (IDF).



Don't need to, just have to look in Jane's or IISS publications and if I can't be bothered to do that, there's always Wikipedia to point the way for more detailed information Military equipment of Israel - Wikipedia



RoccoR said:


> You inserted video was not an example of Counter-battery fire on Hostile Arab Palestinians



No, it was an example of the availability of precision munitions in Zionist Israel, do keep up.



RoccoR said:


> Second, I do not believe that the Israeli Air Force currently has strategic bombers capable of (as you say) "carper bombing."



No idea what "carper bombing" is but *carpet* bombing is a figure of speech and also a technical term forom WW2 for an indiscriminate wide area saturation attack with high explosive ordinance. Oh, and given your average F-16 can carry oa bomb load rough that of two B-17 WW2 era strategic bombers, who needs actual strategic bombers?



RoccoR said:


> Third, I don't think that the Israeli Air Force has the inventory to answer the 4000 rocket launches leading up to the Israeli Military respond in 2014. For instance, the air-to-ground Hellfire FMS costs is about $115,000 each. The FMS cost of a Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) is in excess of $25K each.



Maybe not, but Uncle Sam has. US Restocks Israel's Ammunition Supplies Hours After Condemning Attack On A UN School In Gaza



RoccoR said:


> You will not find any similar legal apparatus or self-policing mechanism in the Arab Palestinian system. No Hostile Arab Palestinian review is anywhere nowhere near as moral as the Israel system.



If only the IDF took any notice whatsoever of the Israeli legal system:

Israeli Chief Rabbi To Troops: Ignore Courts, Commander, Just Kill Armed Palestinians

..: IDF Ignores Rulings of Israels Supreme Court :..



RoccoR said:


> Yeah, OK, if I was attempting to hide something from you, I would not have given you the direct link back to the copied photo source. The Daily Stormer, photocopy just happened to be the first copied photo in the query. If you go to the query page, you will find that is the only one that replicates what you rendered.



I honestly don't think you were attempting to hide anything, your hubris just prevented you from bothering to check. Had you done so you'd have scrolled down and found 18 alternative versions of that photograph in both left wing and right wing media and sources that you could have chosen instead.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 20, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > For example, you said, "non-Jews can not buy land that Jews can buy". Factually, legally, untrue. There is no land in Israel that is legally distinguished as being land that only Jews can buy. And if you can find me any such Israeli law, please present it.
> ...



Gosh I wonder how many Palestinian citizens of Israel have opted to leave Israel?  I don't know of even one.  Do you?


----------



## Hollie (Dec 20, 2016)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > First, I don't think you known anything about the technology available to the Israeli Defense Force (IDF).
> ...



Really, sweetie. You're cutting and pssting from someone's personal blog?

Chuckle.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 20, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Why would they leave their homeland?


----------



## Shusha (Dec 21, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Why would they leave their homeland?



People leave their homelands all the time, for all sorts of reasons:  war, conflict, persecution, pogroms, expulsion, poverty, education, drought, disease, different weather, going back to their roots.  The reasons are too numerous to quantify.  

The more interesting question is why they won't leave their homeland.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 21, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







Why would the Jews leave theirs ?   Or again why would the arab muslims leave Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Iran and Saudi and go and live in gaza or the west bank. Dont you believe the words of the palestinians when they say they are from these nations, or do you ignore them as well ?
The arab muslims that are living in Israel are the true arab muslim palestinians that have lived there for many generations since the fall of the Roman Empire. Unlike the ones that fled when the arab league told them to in 1947 because they had no ties to the lands


----------



## P F Tinmore (Dec 21, 2016)

Phoenall said:


> Unlike the ones that fled when the arab league told them to in 1947 because they had no ties to the lands


Crock of Israeli shit.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 21, 2016)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Unlike the ones that fled when the arab league told them to in 1947 because they had no ties to the lands
> ...







 FACTS as shown by the video evidence from the palestinians own mouths


https://www.quora.com/Did-Arab-news...-didnt-leave-Israel-before-the-Arabs-attacked

The Economist, a frequent critic of the Zionists, reported on October 2, 1948: “Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit... It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades.”

Palestinian Press Admits Arab League Created The Palestinian Refugees - The Lid


After the war, the Palestine Arab leaders did try to help people — including their own — to forget that it was they who had called for the exodus in the early spring of 1948. They now blamed the leaders of the invading Arab states themselves. These had added their voices to the exodus call, though not until some weeks after the Palestine Arab Higher Committee had taken a stand.
– Kenneth O. Bilby, New Star in the Middle East, (Doubleday, 1950).


----------



## Challenger (Dec 21, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



That's because if they did, they wouldn't be allowed back in.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 21, 2016)

Challenger said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Well I'll be darned.  And here I actually believed not a single Israeli Palestinian citizen has chosen to leave Israel because they know how blessed they are being Israeli citizens.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 21, 2016)

MJB12741 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...



You mean these guys.  They certainly don't feel blessed to be in Israel, they just intend not move an inch to help the Zionists.

*Don't Call Us 'Israeli Arabs': Palestinians in Israel Speak Out*


" Palestinian thinkers inside Israel writing 68 years after the Nakba reaffirm that they are not just Arabs, but Palestinian Arabs, and that while they may be “in Israel,” they are not Israel’s: they are their own masters.
These Palestinian citizens of Israel are its Achilles’ heel; they refuse to become Zionists, refuse to leave Israel, and refuse to vanish into thin air. And, increasingly, they are refusing to remain a silent, or passive, player."

read more: Don't call us 'Israeli Arabs': Palestinians in Israel speak out


----------



## Hollie (Dec 21, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



I'm not surprised that Israeli Arabs won't leave Israel. Dies anyone believe that they would choose to leave the relative safety and Israel and its myriad advantages over your Islamist dystopia? LOL.


----------



## montelatici (Dec 21, 2016)

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > MJB12741 said:
> ...



Why would they leave their homes and land knowing that the Jews would steal them as they have always done?  LOL


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 21, 2016)

montelatici said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...








 And soon they will find themselves on the move as they will be classed as hostile aliens and not citizens. The Geneva conventions and International law is clear on this and the Israeli's are within their rights to evict/deport the arab muslims that are declaring themselves to be of another nationality


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 21, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...









 Always done , as in for the last 1400 years. Or are you projecting again and twisting the facts to meet with your POV


----------



## Shusha (Dec 21, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Why would they leave their homes and land knowing that the Jews would steal them as they have always done?  LOL



The Jews have ALWAYS stolen land?  That seems rather unsupportable.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 22, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Why would they leave their homes and land knowing that the Jews would steal them as they have always done?  LOL
> ...








 Wont stop him from spreading this LIE all over the place, and then claiming it must be true cos he read it on the internet


----------



## Challenger (Dec 22, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Why would they leave their homes and land knowing that the Jews would steal them as they have always done?  LOL
> ...


----------



## Hollie (Dec 22, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Why post the same slogans and clichés about stealing land? We know from the Ottoman land records that large swaths of the territory you falsely believe to be your invented "country of Pal'istan" was owned by foreigners from Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. The Arab invaders / squatters were the ones stealing land.


----------



## MJB12741 (Dec 22, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Why would they leave their homes and land knowing that the Jews would steal them as they have always done?  LOL
> ...



But what about those Zionists building their wailing wall around the Al Aqsa Mosque?  Heh Heh!


----------



## montelatici (Dec 22, 2016)

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Why would they leave their homes and land knowing that the Jews would steal them as they have always done?  LOL
> ...



With respect to Palestine it is eminently supportable.


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 22, 2016)

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...








 YES as you have LIED IN PURSUANCE OF A RACIST ATTACK ON THE JEWS MAKING YOU A CRIMINAL IN THE EYES OF THE LAW


----------



## Phoenall (Dec 22, 2016)

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...









 So what land have they stolen from arab muslims between 70 C.E. and 2016 C.E.   Delineate the land starting from 70 C.E.


----------

